AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Home AIMS Energy Article
PDF (2.1 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research Article | Open Access

Thermal energy storage using phase-change material in evacuated-tubes solar collector

Akthem Mohi Al-Abdali( )Handri Ammari
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mutah University, Mutah, Karak 61710, Jordan
Show Author Information

Abstract

The use of phase change materials in solar thermal collectors improves their thermal performance significantly. In this paper, a comparative study is conducted systematically between two solar receivers. The first receiver contains paraffin wax, while the other does not. The goal was to find out to which degree paraffin wax can enhance the energy storage and thermal efficiency of evacuated tubes solar collectors. Measurements of water temperature and solar radiation were recorded on a few days during August of 2021. The experimental analysis depended on two stages. The first stage had a flow rate of 7 L/hr, and the second stage had no flow rate. A flow rate of 7 L/hr gave an efficiency of 47.7% of the first receiver with phase-change material, while the second conventional receiver had an efficiency rate of 40.6%. The thermal efficiency of the first receiver during the day at which no flow rate was applied was 41.6%, while the second one had an efficiency rate of 35.2%. The study's significant results indicated that using paraffin wax in solar evacuated tube water-in-glass thermal collectors can enhance their thermal energy storage by about 8.6% and efficiency by about 7%. Moreover, the results revealed that the solar thermal collector containing paraffin wax had an annual cost of 211 USD/year. At the same time, the receiver's yearly fuel cost was 45 USD. Compared to an electrical geyser, the annual cost reached 327 USD, with an annual fuel cost equaled 269 USD. The first receiver's payback period was 5.35 years.

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
AIMS Energy
Pages 486-505

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
Al-Abdali AM, Ammari H. Thermal energy storage using phase-change material in evacuated-tubes solar collector. AIMS Energy, 2022, 10(3): 486-505. https://doi.org/10.3934/energy.2022024

4

Views

0

Downloads

0

Crossref

8

Web of Science

10

Scopus

Received: 17 February 2022
Revised: 03 June 2022
Accepted: 06 June 2022
Published: 15 June 2022
©2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)