Investigation of Aluminium as Thermal Storage for Solar

Cooking Application.

Ashutosh Dev1, *, Sunam Amatya1, Yogesh Dumre1, Malesh Shah1, Prof. Peter V. Schwartz2

1
Deptartment of Mechanical Engineering, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Nepal
2
Physics Department, Bailey College of Science & Mathematics, California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo, CA, USA

*E-mail: devashutosh31@gmail.com

Abstract: The WHO (2016) states that 3 billion people use biomass and coal for cooking, resulting in
4 million annual deaths due to emissions. This fuels indoor air pollution, deforestation, CO2
emissions, and soot release, exacerbating environmental concerns. The presented Insulated Solar
Electric Cooker (ISEC) addresses these challenges with a fuel-free, emission-free cooking solution,
harmonizing with diverse culinary traditions to promote sustainable cooking practices. This paper
investigates the practical implementation of aluminium-based solid thermal storage (STS) as a thermal
battery within the ISEC framework, enabling the capture and storage of solar panel-generated heat.
This stored energy guarantees uninterrupted cooking even when solar irradiation is unavailable,
thereby enhancing the cooker's overall utility. This research conducts thorough evaluations of STS
dimensions, material selection, and thermal battery setup, combining theoretical insights with
experimental findings. Additionally, a novel approach is presented for easily converting the ISEC into
a grid-connected system with minimal design changes or component adjustments. This approach
leverages the existing thermal battery, thereby enhancing energy efficiency while preserving
functional integrity. This study investigates an 8 kg aluminium test unit, powered by a 200W supply
through a heating element. The main objective was to minimize heat loss to the surroundings, while
sustaining the STS temperature above 200°C for at least 2 hours after power shutdown, ensuring
sufficient cooking temperatures. The experiment encountered limitations, including a consistently sub-
200W power supply to the STS and heat loss due to imperfect STS-heating element contact. However,
results demonstrated effective insulation, maintaining the STS at temperatures above 250°C for 3
hours after power was discontinued. Additionally, this paper shares practical findings concerning the
energy stored in the thermal mass, presenting the optimal heating temperature for the thermal battery
to achieve longer heat retention, ensuring sufficient cooking temperatures and conditions.

1. Introduction
Insulated Solar Electric Cookers (ISEC) offer an affordable and eco-friendly alternative to the
conventional use of harmful biomass for cooking, a practice prevalent in many developing nations [1].
These ISECs utilize insulation to harness and retain heat, enabling the cooking of food with low-power
solar panels. This approach not only cuts down on expenses but also brings this technology within
reach of communities that need it most. While the initial adoption and utilization of this technology
have proven successful, its widespread implementation faces significant challenges due to the
limitations of the current direct-cook approach [2]. This approach involves an electric heating element
directly linked to an electrical power source and an insulated cooking pot.

Unfortunately, this setup is constrained by certain factors. Primarily, in remote communities where
access to an electric grid is limited or absent, solar panels become a necessity to power the Integrated
Solar Electric Cooker (ISEC). This reliance on solar energy restricts cooking activities to daylight
hours, which is a notable drawback. Furthermore, the commonly used 100-Watt solar panel
configuration leads to a "low-and-slow" cooking experience akin to using a crockpot [3]. This can pose
challenges when attempting to prepare local dishes that require frying, charring, or searing, as the
current setup may not provide the necessary heat intensity for such culinary techniques. In this paper,
we explore the use of aluminum as thermal batteries as a solution to address this issue.

This study looks into using aluminum as solid thermal storage (STS) as a way to store energy in
insulated solar electric cookers (ISEC). In our research, we implemented a Solid Thermal Storage
(STS) system as an augmentation to an existing Integrated Solar Electric Cooker (ISEC). We
conducted comprehensive testing across various environmental conditions. Our investigation explored
into critical factors, including the optimal size, suitable materials, and effective shape for the STS,
considering both theoretical principles and practical application. Subsequently, we performed
experiments to validate our findings.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Thermal Storage and STS

Numerous initiatives are actively exploring various energy storage solutions, such as batteries and
phase change materials (PCM), to address these limitations. One innovative approach involves the use
of Erythritol as a PCM to store energy in the form of heat, which can then be directly transferred to the
food when cooking is required [4]. In parallel, several groups are working on battery storage solutions,
each with its unique approach. For instance, the AMPERES project educates communities on
recycling used batteries and assembling them into battery packs for energy storage purposes [5].
Nonetheless, it's important to note that these technologies also have their own drawbacks. Batteries,
for instance, are costly and, similar to Erythritol, tend to degrade over prolonged usage. Consequently,
it becomes crucial to explore alternative methods of energy storage, taking into account local cost
factors and the availability of materials [5].

Solid Thermal Storage (STS) presents an intriguing alternative, involving the use of a substantial
thermal mass, often a block of metal, to retain heat for future utilization. This method possesses
several advantageous qualities: it's considered safe, relatively cost-effective, and can be seamlessly
integrated into pre-existing direct-cook Integrated Solar Electric Cookers (ISECs) with minimal
modifications [6]. Additionally, in contrast to many other storage solutions, STS does not deteriorate
with continuous use and is expected to outlast the service life of the ISEC itself.

Nevertheless, STS does come with certain limitations. Its weight can be substantial, and its cooking
performance is notably influenced by the thermal conductivity between the cookpot and the storage
device. In this research, we delve into the incorporation of STS into an existing direct-cook ISEC and
aim to comprehensively assess its performance across diverse conditions through a combination of
real-world experiments and computer simulations.

2.2. Selection of Solid Thermal Storage

Before incorporating the Solid Thermal Storage (STS) component, careful consideration was given to
both the material and size of the solid thermal storage unit. These aspects are pivotal in shaping the
operational behaviour of the STS and are intricately linked to factors like input power, insulation
effectiveness, and material availability [6]. Importantly, material choice and sizing are interdependent
and must be decided upon in conjunction. With a primary objective of ensuring accessibility, our
material selection process was confined to locally available resources.

Various materials can serve as solid thermal storage mediums, but metals possessing both a high
specific heat and density are particularly well-suited for this purpose. This is because they offer the
highest volumetric heat capacity, thus maximizing their ability to store energy. Additionally, a high
level of thermal conductivity is crucial for efficient power delivery during cooking. Among the limited
selection of commonly used metals, as presented in Table 1 below, it becomes evident that aluminium
and copper outshine the rest due to their exceptional volumetric heat capacities and thermal
conductivities [7].
Table 1. Material Selection
Material Specific Density Thermal Volumetric Cost per Energy
Heat 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑚 [ 3] Conductivity Specific Heat Kilogram Capacity
𝐽 ( ) 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑡 𝐽 [4][5]
Per
𝑐𝑚 3 [3] ( 3 ) Dollar
( )
[3] ( )
𝑐𝑚 ∗𝐾 𝐽
𝑚 ∗𝐾
𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑚 ∗𝐾 ( )
$ ∗𝐾
Steel 0.47 7.8 43 3.67 $12.81 36.68
Iron 0.44 7.8 80 3.43 $14.13 31.14
Aluminum 0.9 2.7 235 2.43 $25.17 35.75
Nickel 0.44 8.91 91 3.93 $233.19 1.89
Copper 0.38 8.92 400 3.39 $44.95 8.45
Lead 0.13 11.34 35 1.47 $12.27 10.59

Considering its superior combination of volumetric heat capacity and thermal conductivity, copper
emerges as the optimal choice from a performance standpoint. However, the widespread demand for
copper makes it an expensive option for solid thermal storage (STS) applications. Furthermore, copper
is prone to developing a thin layer of greenish-blue corrosion known as patina when exposed to the
atmosphere, potentially affecting the performance of STS [7].

In contrast, aluminium offers a more cost-effective solution due to its affordability. It distinguishes
itself with its high thermal conductivity and relatively substantial volumetric heat capacity.
Additionally, aluminium naturally forms a corrosion-resistant oxide layer, making it suitable for
extended use in rural environments [8]. Moreover, aluminium is readily available in significant
quantities along the West Coast of Africa, particularly in countries like Guinea, Ghana, and Cameroon
[8]. This local accessibility to raw materials not only reduces costs for end users but also supports the
surrounding communities. For these compelling reasons, aluminium was chosen as the material for
STS in this experiment.

Steel and iron also present attractive options due to their cost-effectiveness and high volumetric heat
capacity. Unfortunately, their thermal conductivity is comparatively lower when compared to copper
and aluminium.

2.3 STS Sizing

The STS selection process proceeds to the next phase, which involves sizing and is structured into two
distinct steps. In the initial step, we calculate the mass of the STS, a value influenced by factors such
as the intended operational temperature, storage capacity requirements, and budgetary considerations.
The second step, although relatively straightforward, entails finding the optimal dimensions for the
STS, considering the determined mass and adhering to constraints like the specific size and shape
dictated by the ISEC requirements.

For the purpose of determining the appropriate mass for the STS, we made an assumption regarding
the availability of a 200-Watt solar panel to the STS user. The user's daily routine begins with using
the solar panel to cook breakfast, brunch, or lunch directly. After the cooking tasks are completed, any
surplus energy generated during the day is then stored in the STS for later use, typically for cooking in
the early evening or shortly after nightfall. This allocation of energy resources leaves approximately
four hours of sunlight, which corresponds to about half of the daily energy requirements, to gradually
raise the STS's temperature to its desired level in preparation for subsequent cooking sessions.

The total energy available for storage by the STS can be found via Equation 1 by multiplying the input
power by the heating duration.
Etotal = 𝑃𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 × D𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (1)

𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 200 𝑊 × (4 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠) = 0.8𝑘𝑊ℎ

To estimate the initial temperature of the STS after absorbing a full day's worth of energy, denoted as
Etotal, for a given mass and starting temperature, we can use Equation 2, where the variable 'c' represents
the specific heat of the chosen material. In this case, 0.9 J/gK [9]
 Etotal
Tinitial = Tstart + (2)
Mass× c

Plotting Equation 2 over a range of STS masses yields Figure 1, below.

Boiling water is of paramount importance, especially in regions with limited access to clean water,
such as many developing countries [10]. Therefore, it is crucial for us to take into account the quantity
of water that can be brought to a boil. Water typically boils at 100°C under standard conditions. Given
that the STS operates by relying on a temperature gradient to supply heat, it must maintain a
temperature above 100°C while boiling water. This means that the energy stored within the STS below
100°C is effectively unavailable for use during the boiling process.

Figure 1. STS Mass vs Temperature

The amount of useable energy, Eavailable, in an STS device, can be estimated as the heat lost by going
from its initial, post-heating, temperature to the desired temperature of the thermal load, food in most
cases.
𝐸𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = (𝑇𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 − 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑) ×𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 × c (3)

The contours depicted in Figure 2 show a clear trend: as the desired temperature for cooking food with
the STS (Short-Term Storage) system increases to 50°C, 75°C, and 100°C, there is a noticeable
decrease in the available usable energy. This decline in usable energy is associated with an increase in
the mass of the STS. Essentially, as more material is added to the STS, a greater portion of energy is
consumed to maintain the STS at the desired heat transfer threshold, T desired. While heat is still being
stored within the STS, it becomes challenging to harness this stored heat effectively because a
significant temperature gradient between the STS and the heat sink is lacking.

Figure. 2 Useful energy vs STS mass

This strongly suggests that opting for the lightest feasible STS is a viable strategy, as it would
maximize the available energy for various threshold temperatures. However, it's important to note that
in real-world scenarios, numerous factors come into play. As illustrated in Figure 1, reducing the mass
of the STS leads to a significant rise in its peak operating temperature. This place added stress on the
internal components of the ISEC and results in greater heat loss through the insulation. Consequently,
a larger portion of the stored heat is lost before it can be used for cooking, especially when compared
to an STS operating at a lower temperature threshold [11].

Achieving the right balance in this situation can be quite challenging, and ultimately, it falls upon the
user to determine what best suits their specific application. As a starting point, an STS within the 6-to-
8-kilogram range appears to strike a reasonable compromise between operating temperature and
available free energy capacity. Additionally, opting for a lighter STS also has the benefit of reducing
material costs, a critical factor for the success of STS ISECs in real-world applications [10]. In an
effort to lower operating temperatures, we made the decision to use an 8 kg STS for the retrofitting
process.
2.3. STS Retrofitting

As previously discussed, a multitude of direct-cook Integrated Solar Energy Cookers (ISECs) have
been successfully deployed in diverse global communities. This trend has significantly heightened the
appeal of incorporating Solid Thermal Storage (STS) solutions into these ISEC systems [12]. In this
context, an existing ISEC unit underwent a retrofitting process, wherein an 8kg STS system was
integrated alongside a carefully selected heating element. This retrofitting endeavour was executed
with a keen focus on ensuring the ergonomic functionality of the ISEC.

The heating element of choice for this project was a Ni-Cr (Nickel-Chromium) wire coil. This
selection was made due to its advantageous characteristics, including a high melting temperature and
wide availability in the market [13]. The ceramic heater base was chosen to serve as the foundation for
the heating element, which was strategically positioned beneath the STS unit.

The integration of the STS and Ni-Cr heating element was a crucial step in enhancing the capabilities
of the ISEC. This upgrade not only extended the cooking duration by effectively harnessing and
storing solar thermal energy but also ensured that the ISEC remained user-friendly and ergonomic in
its design and operation. The result was an improved, more efficient, and sustainable cooking solution
that catered to the specific needs of the community it served.

Figure 3. Al STS Figure 4. Heating Element

Figure 5. Heater Base Figure 6. ISEC

2.4. Heating and Cooling Test

Heating and cooling experiments in thermal mass studies are conducted to understand how materials
store, release, and respond to thermal energy. This knowledge is crucial for designing energy-efficient
systems, optimizing temperature regulation, selecting appropriate materials for specific applications,
and ensuring safety and comfort in various contexts, from building design to electronics and energy
storage systems [14]. This paper presents an experiment based heating and cooling test of an 8 Kg
aluminium block. The schematic of the experiment is illustrated in fig.

Figure 7. ISEC (AC grid operated) Figure 8. ISEC (Solar operated)

Both AC and Solar (DC) power supply was used to heat the heating element and eventually store heat
in the STS. The STS underwent a controlled heating process, reaching target temperatures of 200°C,
250°C, and eventually 300°C, guided by predictions, which considered the final temperature of the
STS after 5 hours of heating at 200 Watts. This experiment yielded several significant findings upon
analyzing each operational phase. A crucial insight emerged: for the STS to be a viable solution, the
ISEC must possess effective insulation capabilities, allowing for sustained cooking activities for
extended periods beyond sunset. The cooling and heating cycle tests played a pivotal role in
identifying strategies to enhance heat retention over longer durations.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Grid Operation

In the first test, we put the Solid Thermal Storage (STS) system through a tough heating and cooling
routine. We used a simple ceramic heater connected to a regular AC power supply, making sure it
stayed at a steady 200 Watts. At the same time, we kept an eye on the STS temperature using a regular
data logger called the Gain Express 4-Channel Datalogger. Our main goal was to heat the STS up to
300°C, which we figured out from earlier predictions in Figure 6. This prediction came from running
the heater for four hours at 200 Watts with an alternating current (AC) supply. The whole heating and
cooling process took around 15 hours, giving us lots of time to closely watch and study how the STS
performed. We found out some really important things about how it handles heat and cold, which will
help us make it work even better.
As the STS's temperature went up, it started losing more heat to its surroundings, just like we
expected. This happened because the difference in temperature between the STS and the environment
got bigger [15]. As the STS got closer to 200°C, the amount of heat going into the STS started to
decrease. At around 100°C, about 60% of the heater's power was getting stored as heat in the STS, but
this dropped to 30% when the STS reached 200°C. Throughout the entire trial, we noticed that the
power supplied to the STS from the heater was consistently around 185 Watts, which was about 15
Watts lower than the theoretical 200 Watts we had initially aimed for. While pinpointing the exact
cause of this difference would require further investigation, it's important to note that this deviation
didn't have a significant impact on the testing or the final results. In fact, this slight discrepancy can be
seen as a valuable aspect of the testing process, as it introduced a level of realism by simulating
conditions that can occur in real-world scenarios where precise control is challenging. This practical
variation allowed us to gain insights into how the STS behaves under less-than-ideal conditions,
enhancing the applicability of our findings to practical applications.

Figure 9. Temperature Rise (AC)

For the Solid Thermal Storage (STS) system to be considered practical and effective, it's essential that
the Insulated Storage Energy Container (ISEC) effectively retains heat, allowing for extended cooking
periods even after sunset. To evaluate this capability, we conducted a test where we heated the STS to
300°C using the ceramic heater and then deliberately removed the power source to mimic a situation
where there's no ongoing energy input. In this scenario, the STS's temperature gradually declined as
heat slowly escaped into the surrounding environment, a natural cooling process that unfolded over the
course of the night. Remarkably, even after a two-hour cooling period, as illustrated in Figure 10 the
STS remained substantially hot, maintaining a temperature of 250°C. This means that the STS still had
ample heat energy available for tasks like boiling a substantial amount of water or cooking food.
Furthermore, the retained heat could be harnessed the next morning, especially in a grid-connected
ISEC setup, for tasks such as boiling water or preparing soupy dishes, thereby offering an extended
utility beyond the initial use. This discovery implies that after the initial usage, subsequent
deployments of the STS may require significantly less time to reach the optimal temperature for
cooking, making it a promising and energy-efficient solution for meeting cooking needs, particularly
in off-grid or intermittent power supply situations.
 Figure 10. Cooling Curves (AC operated)

To determine the heat transfer from the STS to its surroundings, we used the derivative of the STS
temperature, as a higher temperature gradient typically results in increased heat loss, in. Throughout
this trial, we observed that the STS experienced heat losses to the environment, which were directly
related to the temperature difference between the STS and the surrounding ambient conditions. These
losses amounted to approximately 0.15 Watts for each degree Celsius of temperature difference
between the STS and its surroundings. This finding is consistent with earlier testing conducted on a
different Insulated Storage Energy Container (ISEC) with superior insulation properties, where the
heat loss was measured at roughly 0.1 Watts for each degree Celsius of temperature difference [4].

3.2. Solar Operation

Next, we conducted a comprehensive testing phase on the Solid Thermal Storage (STS) system, to
achieve this, we employed a straightforward approach, utilizing a ceramic heater that was connected to
a solar panel with a power output of 200 Watts, supplying the STS with a stable source of direct
current (DC). Simultaneously, we closely monitored the STS's temperature using a standard data
logger known as the Gain Express 4-Channel Datalogger. Our primary objective during this phase was
to elevate the STS's temperature while harnessing the available sunlight. Due to the intermittent nature
of solar irradiation, the heating process extended over approximately 5 hours, allowing us a generous
window to observe and evaluate the STS's performance. This extended timeframe provided us with
valuable insights into how the STS reacts to changing thermal conditions, both in terms of heating and
cooling.

The results yielded crucial information regarding the STS's thermal behavior, shedding light on its
ability to efficiently store and release heat. This newfound knowledge will play a pivotal role in fine-
tuning the STS, ensuring that it operates optimally in various environmental conditions, and ultimately
contributing to its enhanced performance and utility.

Figure 11. Temperature Rise (DC Supply)

As the STS's temperature increased, it followed our expectations and behaved similarly to what we
observed in the grid-operated experiment. This was because the temperature difference between the
STS and its surroundings grew larger, causing more heat to escape. As the STS approached 200°C, the
rate at which it absorbed heat began to decrease. At around 100°C, approximately 60% of the heater's
power was being stored as heat in the STS, but this efficiency dropped to 30% as the STS reached
200°C similar to the on-grid experiment. Throughout the entire trial, we consistently supplied about
185 Watts of power to the STS from the heater, which was slightly lower than our initial target of 200
Watts. While identifying the exact cause of this variance would require further investigation, it's worth
noting that this small difference didn't significantly affect the test results; it might have been due to
fluctuations in solar radiation. Interestingly, this slight deviation added a level of realism to the
experiment, simulating real-world scenarios where precise control can be challenging and enhancing
the practical relevance of our findings.
 Figure 12. Cooling curves (DC supply)

For the Solid Thermal Storage (STS) system to be considered both practical and effective, it's crucial
that the Insulated Storage Energy Container (ISEC) effectively retains heat, enabling prolonged
cooking sessions even after sunset [16]. In this scenario, we observed a gradual decline in the STS's
temperature as heat slowly escaped into the surrounding environment, a natural cooling process that
unfolded over several hours. What's particularly noteworthy is that even after a two-hour cooling
period, as demonstrated in Figure 12, the STS maintained a notably high temperature exceeding
250°C. This implies that the STS retained a significant amount of heat energy, ample for tasks like
boiling substantial quantities of water or cooking food. Furthermore, this retained heat could be
harnessed during the evening, especially in a setup powered by solar energy, for purposes such as
boiling water or preparing soupy dishes, extending its utility beyond its initial use.

This discovery suggests that after the initial use, subsequent deployments of the STS may require
considerably less time to reach the desired cooking temperature. Consequently, this makes the STS a
promising and energy-efficient solution for fulfilling cooking needs, particularly in scenarios with
limited access to a continuous power supply or off-grid settings, where it can be highly beneficial.

3.3. Possible Improvements

At elevated temperatures, a significant portion of the heat contained within the heater is emitted into
the surrounding environment. To enhance the efficiency of STS heating, one effective approach is to
boost the thermal conductivity at the interface [17]. A simple technique is presented to achieve this by
enveloping both the STS and the pancake heater assembly with aluminium foil. This aluminium foil,
by improving mechanical contact, serves as a conduit for heat to transfer from the lower part of the
heater, where it tends to get trapped and lost through the base, into the STS located above.

Figure 13. STS mass vs Variable Insulation

While opting for an 8kg STS was appropriate for controlled testing purposes, it's apparent that this
weight may not be practical for everyday usage, especially when considering the inefficiencies
associated with ISEC heating. Figure 13 clearly illustrates the impact of ISEC insulation on the
selection of STS mass. As the insulation of the ISEC decreases, the performance of the STS also
declines, with the most significant effects observed in STS units weighing less than 4kg. Given that
two critical factors, cost and power delivery, are optimized with a reduction in STS mass, it's
reasonable to conclude that an STS in the range of 7-8kg is the most suitable choice. This assertion is
based on the fact that we are utilizing a 200W power supply instead of the 100W power supply
depicted in Figure 13.

4. Conclusion

Storing cooking heat within an aluminium mass represents a dependable and long-lasting energy
storage solution, facilitating the utilization of insulated solar electric cookers (ISECs) during night-
time hours without requiring additional complexity. The Solid Thermal Storage (STS) system can
seamlessly integrate with existing direct-cook systems, necessitating minimal to no modifications,
thereby simplifying distribution and adoption. Moreover, the accessibility of raw materials in areas
where ISECs are already deployed supports local communities and helps minimize costs. The
selection of an 8kg aluminium STS was appropriate for use with a 200 W solar panel over a 5-hour
day. It's crucial to note that the efficiency of the STS depends on both the STS-heater interface and the
STS-pot interface. Poor performance at these interfaces can limit the system's cooking capacity and
efficiency. Addressing issues like insufficient mechanical contact and thermal loss between the heater
and STS, as well as enhancing the contact and power delivery at the STS-pot interface, are essential
steps for improving the STS system. While the study successfully demonstrated the feasibility of using
 STS for night-time cooking with solar and morning use in a grid-connected setup, future field testing
incorporating the identified improvements, with a focus on user behaviour, will be instrumental in
addressing day-to-day challenges and informing prototype enhancements.

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

[1] M. Osei et al., “Phase change thermal storage: Cooking with more power and versatility,” Solar
Energy, vol. 220, pp. 1065–1073, May 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2021.03.040.
[2] H. K. Y. E. P. and D. R. Alisha Pinto, “Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier
Framework, Nepal - Beyond Connections,” 2019.
[3] A. Asrori, S. Suparman, S. Wahyudi, and D. Widhiyanuriyawan, “AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF
SOLAR COOKER PERFORMANCE WITH THERMAL CONCENTRATOR SYSTEM BY SPOT
FRESNEL LENS,” Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, vol. 5, no. 8–107, pp. 31–
41, 2020, doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2020.208638.
[4] S. Davis, A. Gyokery, K. Smit, and P. Schwartz, “Development of an Insulated Solar Electric Cooker
(ISEC) with Thermal Storage for Use in Developing World Countries,” 2017.
[5] G. Coccia, G. Di Nicola, S. Tomassetti, M. Pierantozzi, M. Chieruzzi, and L. Torre, “Experimental
validation of a high-temperature solar box cooker with a solar-salt-based thermal storage unit,” Solar
Energy, vol. 170, pp. 1016–1025, Aug. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2018.06.021.
[6] S. D. Sharma, T. Iwata, H. Kitano, and K. Sagara, “Thermal performance of a solar cooker based on
an evacuated tube solar collector with a PCM storage unit,” Solar Energy, vol. 78, no. 3, pp. 416–426,
Mar. 2005, doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2004.08.001.
[7] Michael. Fernandez, “‘Exploring the Use of Solid Thermal Storage as an Energy Storage Device in
Insulated Solar Electric Cookers’ Insulated Solar Electric Cooking, Global Learning Community ”.
[8] T. Watkins et al., “Insulated Solar Electric Cooking – Tomorrow’s healthy affordable stoves?,” Dev
Eng, vol. 2, pp. 47–52, Jan. 2017, doi: 10.1016/J.DEVENG.2017.01.001.
[9] M. D. C. K. S. M. S. Khare, “ Selection of materials for high temperature sensible energy storage,”
Solar Energy Materials and solar Cells, vol. Volume 115, 2013.
[10] H. Panchal, “Thermal Properties of Metals, Conductivity, Thermal Expansion, Specific Heat,”
Journal of Ambient Energy, 2020.
[11] C. A. Komolafe and C. E. Okonkwo, “Design, Fabrication, and Thermal Evaluation of a Solar
Cooking System Integrated With Tracking Device and Sensible Heat Storage Materials,” Front
Energy Res, vol. 10, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2022.821098.
[12] J. Spencer and S. Batchelor, “MECS Technology Research Innovation for International Development
(TRIID) Project Reviews-Energy Storage.” [Online]. Available: www.mecs.org.uk
[13] Zaki. Ahmad, “Principles of Corrosion Engineering and Corrosion Control.” 2006.
[14] G. L. (Graham L. Morrison, D. R. (David R. Mills, J. Di, and University of New South Wales. School
of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering., Development of a solar thermal cooking system. School of
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of New South Wales, 1993.
[15] B. Lynn and R. Nguyen, “Consumer-Ready Insulated Solar Electric Cooker Final Design Report,”
2021.
[16] M. Osei, “Development of Phase Change Thermal Storage Medium: Development of Phase Change
Thermal Storage Medium: Cooking with More Power and Versatility Cooking with More Power and
Versatility.” [Online]. Available: https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses/4925
[17] M. Weeman, J. Unger, M. Strutz, and P. Schwartz, “Insulated Solar Electric Cooker with Phase
Change Thermal Storage Medium Final Design Review Report.”