energies

Article
Heat Transfer in Latent High-Temperature Thermal
Energy Storage Systems—Experimental Investigation
Georg Scharinger-Urschitz * , Heimo Walter and Markus Haider
Institute for Energy Systems and Thermodynamics, TU Wien, Getreidemarkt 9, 1060 Wien, Austria;
[email protected] (H.W.); [email protected] (M.H.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +43-58801-302331




Received: 26 February 2019; Accepted: 27 March 2019; Published: 2 April 2019


Abstract: Thermal energy storage systems with phase-change materials promise a high energy
density for applications where heat is to be stored in a narrow temperature range. The advantage of
higher capacities comes along with some challenges in terms of behavior prediction. The heat transfer
into such a storage is highly transient and depends on the phase state, which is either liquid or
solid in the present investigation. The aim is to quantify the heat transfer into the storage and to
compare two different fin geometries. The novel geometry is supposed to accelerate the melting
process. For this purpose, a single tube test rig was designed, built, and equipped with aluminum fins.
The phase-change material temperature as well as the heat-transfer fluid temperature at the inlet and
outlet were measured for charging and discharging cycles. Sodium nitrate is used as phase-change
material, and the storage is operated ±30 ◦C around the melting point of sodium nitrate, which is
306 ◦C. An enthalpy function for sodium nitrate is proposed and the methodology for determining
the apparent heat-transfer rate is provided. The phase-change material temperature trends are shown
and analyzed; different melting in radial and axial directions and in the individual geometry sections
occurs. With the enthalpy function for sodium nitrate, the energy balance is determined over the
melting range. Values for the apparent heat-transfer coefficient are derived, which allow capacity
and power estimations for industrial-scale latent heat thermal energy systems.

Keywords: thermal energy storage; phase-change material; heat-transfer enhancement; fin geometry;
solid-liquid phase-change model; heat exchanger

1. Introduction
Thermal energy storage (TES) systems are widely used to balance between volatile production and
consumption of heat. This spectrum reaches from small TES systems for domestic heating or cooling
up to high-temperature industrial TES systems with operating temperatures of 400 ◦C or more [1].
Domestic and industrial applications TES systems and electricity production systems can increase the
level of use of heat. Storing electricity in the form of heat comes together with the disadvantageous
reconversion to electricity based on the carnot-cycle efficiency. This disadvantage does not appear in
thermal power plants, when heat is stored before being converted to electricity. All thermal power
plants offer a potential field of application for TES systems; among them are the so-called concentrating
solar power (CSP) plants.
According to the IRENA Report on Renewable Power Generation Costs 2017 [2], the global
levelized cost of electricity for CSP decreased from 0.33 USD/kWh in 2010 down to 0.22 USD/kWh in
2017. The globally installed CSP capacity increased from less than 1 GW in 2010 to more than 5.6 GW
in 2017. In 2018, all commissioned CSP plants were equipped with a TES. This has led to an increased
installed capacity of TES worldwide in the past year [3]. Combining CSP with TES comes with the
important unique selling point of decoupling of electricity generation from the availability of renewable

Energies 2019, 12, 1264; doi:10.3390/en12071264 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2019, 12, 1264 2 of 19

energy in form of solar radiation. New developments of TES technology for CSP are described in [4].
Up to now, only sensible storage systems have been applied to commercial CSP plants. At small scale,
a phase-change material (PCM) TES was applied at a Stirling CSP plant in [5]. However, in general,
for this purpose, sensible TES systems are among the most widely used types at the moment. An
exergy efficiency comparison of high-temperature sensible and latent TES is presented in [6] in which
both systems reach similar efficiencies. New concepts also suggest the combination of CSP systems
with supercritical CO2 power cycles and PCM storage, described in [7]. The use of the solid-solid phase
transition of lithium and sodium sulfates mixtures is discussed in [8]; the solid-solid phase-transition
enthalpy of these mixtures is comparable to other solid-liquid phase-transition enthalpies.
The topic of using PCM as storage material to use the heat of fusion and increase the storage
capacity in a specific temperature range is the driving force behind the so-called latent heat TES. From
a scientific point of view, phase-change phenomenon is an important issue, especially but not only
in the solid-liquid phase change for TES applications. As Groulx discusses in [9], a huge amount of
experimental work exists, but up to now the comparability of those different experiments is needs
improvement. The simple comparison of temperature trends is only significant if the thermocouple
position, geometry, and other parameters are comparable. What is missing is the description of the
storage state, the phase-change state coupled with a measurable quantity, and a performance figure for
comparison. This challenge will be discussed in the Materials and Methods section.
A lot of review articles on PCM exist [10–12]. Most of them list a huge variety of potential
materials, their melting points and the latent heat of fusion. Notable is the smaller number of materials
for temperatures higher than 300 ◦C because of limited availability of salts in this temperature range,
and the attempt of all authors to address the problem of low thermal conductivities of the PCM,
especially in the solid state. Therefore, a lot of numerical and experimental investigations have been
published. In recent years, encapsulation and the use of additives have been focused on by parts of the
scientific community. Macro-encapsulation is investigated in [13], providing a detailed development
strategy for the whole encapsulation process using metal cans. The process is feasible, but costs are
still too high for present application. In [14], polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) is used as a coating
material; thermal and chemical stability for temperatures lower than 350 ◦C were shown. Decreasing
the encapsulation size leads to micro-encapsulation with a capsule size less than 1 µm. A technique was
developed for molten salts; in the specific investigation potassium nitrate served as PCM [15]. Thermal
stability and control ability of the process were proven. Nanoparticles may increase the conductivity
of PCM, as Hu is demonstrating in [16]; separation effects reduce the positive effect of the particles.
The reverse idea is to use aluminum foam with nano-PCM filling. In doing so, the foam can increase the
heat-transfer performance; the ratio between the foam and the PCM volume is crucial, as demonstrated
in [17]. Other ideas are the direct contact PCM storage in which the PCM and the heat-transfer fluid
(HTF) are not separated through a heat exchanger [18], or a screw heat exchanger [19] for keeping
the PCM in a transportable state. A good review on transportable PCMs is provided in [20]. Besides
the mentioned enhancements of the heat transfer, the most common method is the use of fins. Many
experimental investigations are using them because fins are a simple method to increase the surface
area and therefore the heat-transfer rate. A sodium nitrate PCM storage was designed and erected
in [21] for application in a power plant, equipped with aluminum fins and a storage capacity of
700 kW h. Other test rigs with finned heat exchanger tubes are described in [22,23]. Using fins comes
with two questions: which contour should they have, and how should they be positioned in the
storage? To answer these questions, mostly numerical investigations have been carried out using e.g.,
topology optimization in [24,25]. Different fin positions are focused on in [26] or [27], and fins versus
pins are investigated in [28]. The influence of the fin design is shown in [29,30]. Three main findings
can be summarized from the mentioned literature. When using fins, an arborescent fin structure shows
good results. Then, natural convection plays a role, especially for melting, and finally longitudinally
and vertically finned tubes show accumulation of liquid PCM at the top of the storage, in numerical
investigations [31] and experiments [23].
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 3 of 19

Besides the geometry, material compatibility may limit the use of different materials in a PCM
storage. As Qiu describes in [32], different stainless steels and their compatibility with NaF-NaCl
eutectic salt were examined, and generally low corrosion activity was observed. This is supported
by unpublished corrosion tests at the Institute of Energy Systems and Thermodynamics, where
different materials (conventional steel, aluminum, and copper) were exposed to liquid sodium nitrate
at high temperature. Copper shows significant corrosion rates while aluminum and steel keep the
tested weight.
Another topic regarding fins is the mounting on the HTF tube. Probably, the HTF tube material is
different to the fin material; the tube may be exposed to high pressure while the fins are supposed to
have high heat conductivity. For the actual test rig, the aluminum fins were attached with hinged bolt
clamps; for future experiments, bimetallic finned tubes with bending edges will be used as described
in [33]. Another mounting technique is clipping, as described in [34]; this promising technology is
currently under investigation in an industrial-scale test rig.
For the different enhancement methods, the comparison of models with experiments are common,
often with improper assumptions as in [35], where the authors consider conduction as the sole
heat-transfer mechanism. The selection of the suitable PCM can be challenging, as Gasia et al. is
demonstrating in [36] or Maldonaldo et al. for a higher temperature range between 210 ◦C and
270 ◦C [37]. The influence of the inner heat transfer from the HTF to the tube can also be crucial,
as presented in [38]. For low-HTF mass flows, a laminar flow establishes that the heat-transfer
coefficient can be lower than on the PCM side of the tube. A good summary of PCM for TES applications
is provided in [39].
For the present experimental investigation, a novel fin combination of transversal and longitudinal
fins, mounted vertically in a PCM storage, are supposed to be examined. The melting behavior is
detected by a higher number of temperature testing points to compare the results qualitatively with
numerical investigations mentioned above. Finally, a simple method for describing the enthalpy
function of a PCM is presented.

2. Materials and Methods

At this point, the test rig design for the experimental investigation is presented, and the measuring
concept and the methodology are explained. The parameters used for the experiments are described,
and finally the phase-change model and the heat-transfer coefficient are presented in this section.

2.1. Test Rig and Testing Point Positions

For the carried-out experiments, a storage test rig was designed and erected at the Institute
for Energy Systems and Thermodynamic (IET) at TU Wien, as shown in Figure 1 on the right.
As storage material, pure sodium nitrate was selected. The storage vessel is basically a vertical
shell-and-tube-design heat exchanger. The inner HTF steel tube is equipped with aluminum fins;
between the finned tube and the vessel shell 280 kg of PCM was filled in. The storage system is
designed as a single tube system; the HTF inlet and outlet are positioned at the bottom and the top of
the storage. The vessel has a height of 3.5 m where 3 m is filled with PCM. The outer diameter of the
vessel shell is 273 mm; the HTF steel tube has a diameter of 33.7 mm; the aluminum fins are attached
at the steel tube with hinged bolt clamps. Regarding the fins, both transversal and longitudinal fins are
applied. The vessel is divided into five sections, within the sections the longitudinal fins are mounted,
and the transversal fins mark the borders between the sections. The combination of both fin types is a
remarkable novelty compared to former experimental investigations as it is displayed in Figure 2.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 4 of 19

Figure 1. Thermal oil plant and storage test rig scheme.

Figure 2. Novel fin geometry with profile dimensions and a picture of the uninsulated test rig.

A thermal oil plant, as shown in Figure 1 on the left, is used for supplying the test rig with
the required heating and cooling power. Therefore, an electric heater with 280 kWth and a 200 kWth
water-cooler together with mass flow controllers provide a precisely controlled HTF mass flow with
temperatures up to 390 ◦C . The thermal oil flow direction can be switched by using valves V30–V33 to
change the inlet and outlet of the storage. Preliminary work with a comparable storage system [23]
showed that the flow direction has an impact on the melting behavior for plain vertical longitudinal
fins. When using the novel geometry layout with uniformly distributed transversal fins over a vertical
longitudinally finned tube, the flow direction has no effect on the melting behavior anymore, as shown
in [40]. Regarding flow direction for the experiments, the direction from the bottom of the storage to
the top was chosen.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 5 of 19

As shown in Figure 3, temperature testing points are distributed over the whole storage volume
in radial and axial direction. The aim was to distribute the temperature testing points uniformly in
both radial and axial direction. The temperature is measured with PT100 temperature sensors with an
accuracy level AA specified in DIN EN 60751 [41]. For a temperature of 340 ◦ C a deviation of ±0.68 ◦ C
is acceptable for this sensor type. In radial direction, the positions Ta -Td are arranged 47 mm, 72 mm,
93 mm and 136.5 mm from the storage axis. This distribution correlates with the radial discretization
of the storage volume. The four radial layers are used to calculate the energy balance of the storage.
For the radial layers a and b, three testing points per vertical section are installed, for the layers c and d
only one testing point per section is available. The axial distances to the subjacent transversal fin are
100 mm, 294 mm and 488 mm for Ta and Tb . The outer layer testing points Tc and Td are positioned
400 mm, 1100 mm, 1800 mm and 2500 mm from the bottom of the vessel. Besides the PCM temperature,
the HTF temperature is measured at the inlet THTF1 and the outlet THTF2 of the storage vessel. For all
temperature sensors, a calibration curve was determined by using a temperature dry-well calibrator.
Especially for the operation temperature range, the sensors were calibrated precisely to increase the
accuracy level. Beside the temperatures, the HTF mass flow is measured with a Proline Prowirl72F
from Endress + Hauser Management AG in the secondary loop of the thermal oil plant. This sensor
uses a vortex-based measuring principle and has an accuracy of ±1% of the nominal volume flow.
The whole plant is equipped with a process control system named APROL from B&R Industrial
Automation GmbH. This system allows automatic operation and data acquisition; the examination of
the measured data was done with MATLAB.

Figure 3. Testing point positions in the PCM.

2.2. Parameter Sets

For a more detailed characterization of the experimental investigation and for repeatability,
the parameters in Table 1 are provided. A latent TES basically is operated around the melting
point of the PCM; for the present PCM the melting temperature is 306 ◦C. For charging, the HTF inlet
temperature is adjusted higher, the difference to the melting point is called the temperature spread ∆T,
which is 30 ◦C. For discharging, the HTF inlet temperature is controlled to 276 ◦C. The HTF mass flow
is controlled to either 1 kg s−1 or 3 kg s−1 , depending on the parameter set. The mass flow represents
the only difference between the two sets used in the present investigation. More parameter sets with
different temperature spreads and mass flows are provided in [42].
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 6 of 19

Table 1. Parameter sets.

Parameter Symbol Parameter Set 1 Parameter Set 2

Charging time tch 6h 6h
Discharging time tdis 6h 6h
Temperature spread ∆T 30 ◦C 30 ◦C
PCM melting temperature Tmelt 306 ◦C 306 ◦C
HTF inlet temperature charging THTF1 336 ◦C 336 ◦C
HTF inlet temperature discharging THTF1 276 ◦C 276 ◦C
HTF mass flow ṁ 1 kg s−1 3 kg s−1
HTF flow direction - THTF1 to THTF2 THTF1 to THTF2

2.3. Phase-Change Material

2.3.1. Modeling the Phase Change

To calculate the energy balance of the storage, the phase change must be described mathematically.
In particular, the handling of the latent heat of fusion L is of interest. Theoretically, the PCM melts at its
specific melting temperature Tmelt and during melting no temperature change occurs to the material.
From an energy-balance point of view, the specific enthalpy is required and can be written as

h( T ) = hsens ( T ) + L T ≥ Tmelt . (1)

h( T ) consists of the enthalpy based on the sensible heat and the latent heat of fusion, if the phase
change has already happened. Because the temperature in the PCM is measured in non-infinitesimal
discretized volumes, the application of L exactly at Tmelt is not recommended. Around a particular
temperature testing point, the PCM shows a heterogeneous temperature distribution. For calculating
the energy balance for these specific non-infinitesimal discretized volumes, only one measured
temperature is available. Referring to numerical and experimental investigations such as [43], the latent
heat of fusion is distributed over a specific melting range. In the present investigation, the lower and
upper border are called Ts and Tl . The borders are supposed to be chosen in a way that a major part of
the PCM in the discretized area is solid when reaching the temperature Ts and reverses for Tl . If the
PCM is not fully liquid, the enthalpy can be written as follows:
Z T Z T Z T
h( T ) = hsens ( T ) + γ( T ) L = c p,sen ( T )dT + c∗p ( T )dT = c p,app ( T )dT (2)
Tre f Tre f Tre f

The liquid fraction γ( T ) introduced in Equation (2) is a common quantity to describe the
progress of the phase change and has values between 0 for full solidification and 1 for the liquid
state. The enthalpy based on the sensible heat hsens ( T ) corresponds to the integral of the specific
sensible heat capacity of the PCM. The latent heat of fusion L( T ) distributed over a temperature range
is defined as equivalent specific heat capacity for the melting range, called c∗p . The correlation between
c∗p and the liquid fraction is
RT ∗
Tre f c p ( T )
γ( T ) = . (3)
L
Furthermore, the apparent specific heat capacity c p,app is introduced. The apparent specific heat
capacity is a combination of the specific heat capacity and the latent heat of fusion. It is possible to
compare this function directly with physical measurements of the specific heat capacities and the latent
heat of fusion. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) is the most common measurement method
to determine these values, as described in [44]. Attention must be paid to the heating rate, as it has a
direct influence on the determination of the melting temperature. Lower heating rates lead to more
accurate melting temperatures; the heat of fusion and the melting point must be determined separately.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 7 of 19

Anyway, the result of such heat capacity measurements is a heat capacity function over time as
provided in [45,46]. For the present model, the specific heat capacity is described with three functions.

c p,s ( T )

 Tlrv ≤ T < Ts
c p,sen ( T ) = c p,m ( T ) Ts ≤ T ≤ Tl (4)


c ( T )
p,l Tl < T ≤ Turv

One for the solid temperature range, one for the liquid temperature range, and one for the
melting range. The melting-range function is a simple linear interpolation between the specific heat
capacity c p,s ( Ts ) for the solid range and c p,l ( Tl ) for the liquid range. The solid and liquid heat capacity
function can be determined with DSC measurements; in most cases, fitted linear functions seem to be
adequate. Additional to the specific heat capacity, the latent heat of fusion can be described by using
the equivalent specific heat capacity with a fourth-grade polynomial.

c∗p ( T ) = aT 4 + bT 3 + cT 2 + dT + e Ts ≤ T ≤ Tl (5)

Attention must be drawn to the fact that the equivalent specific heat capacity is defined only in
the melting range; for the solid and the liquid range it is supposed to be zero. In earlier numerical
investigations such as [43], the liquid fraction γ is approximated with an error function. To simplify
the handling of the used functions and to increase the performance, a simple fourth-degree polynomial
was applied as equivalent specific heat capacity c∗p function. The advantage is based on the fact that
the c∗p function can be integrated and derived easily to calculate the liquid fraction and to determine
the specific enthalpy. The boundary conditions satisfied by the c∗p ( T ) polynomial can be summarized
as follows:

c∗p ( Ts ) = 0 (6)
c∗p ( Tl ) = 0 (7)
dc∗p 

dc p,s ( Ts ) dc p,m ( Ts )
 = − (8)
dT Ts  dT dT
dc∗p 

dc p,m ( Tl ) dc p,s ( Tl )
 = − (9)
dT  Tl dT dT
Z T
l
c∗p dT = L (10)
Ts

The boundary conditions ensure that the apparent specific heat capacity function is continuous
(conditions (6) and (7)) and is continuously differentiable over the whole range of application
(conditions (8) and (9)). Condition (10) ensures that the area under c∗p is equivalent to the latent
heat of fusion. With the boundary conditions, the polynomial coefficients in Equation (5) can be
determined by solving a simple linear system of equations. Finally, the apparent specific heat capacity
c p,app and the enthalpy function h( T ) can be described with simple polynomial functions which can be
easily implemented for different PCMs. The application of the above-mentioned procedure is provided
in the following subsection for sodium nitrate.

2.3.2. Sodium Nitrate

In the present experimental investigation, pure sodium nitrate (NaNO3 ) serves as PCM. Literature
references for the melting point Tmelt and the latent heat of fusion L can be found in [47]. The mentioned
values are used for calculating the enthalpy function of sodium nitrate as mentioned above and are
listed in Table 2. The melting temperature range was chosen with ± 6 ◦C around the melting point.
Range of validity 0 ◦C to 400 ◦C was assumed since this range covers the entire operation temperature
range of the storage. Furthermore, specific heat capacity data is available for the mentioned range.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 8 of 19

Table 2. Properties and boundary values of sodium nitrate for the specific enthalpy function.

Description Symbol Value

Melting temperature Tmelt 306 ◦C
Latent heat of fusion L 179.8 kJ kg−1
Solidification temperature limit Ts 300 ◦C
Liquidation temperature limit Tl 312 ◦C
Enthalpy reference temperature Tre f 0 ◦C
Lower range of validity Tlrv 0 ◦C
Upper range of validity Turv 400 ◦C

After specifying the properties and boundary values, the functions for the specific heat capacity
for the different temperature ranges must be determined. For sodium nitrate, they are proposed
as follows: 
c p,s ( T ) = 0.003214T + 0.9262


c p,sen ( T ) = c p,m ( Tcen ) = −0.02Tcen + 1.8904 (11)


c ( T ) = 1.65
p,l

The function for the solid range c p,s ( T ) is based on DSC measurements in [45]. A linear fit for the
c p values seemed to be acceptably exact and led to the mentioned formulation. For the liquid phase,
the value from [47] was chosen and crosschecked with the DSC measurements. For the melting range,
a linear fit between c p,s ( Ts ) and c p,l ( Tl ) centered at Ts led to the c p,m ( Tcen ) function. According to
Equation (2), the latent heat of fusion can be expressed based on the equivalent specific heat capacity
in the form of Equation (5):

c∗p ( Tcen ) = 0.0216147 Tcen

4 3
− 0.518730 Tcen 2
+ 3.110310 Tcen + 0.0232473 Tcen (12)

The polynomial is centered at Ts :

Tcen = T − Ts (13)

In Figure 4 the individual functions are compared with measurements from [45]. Focusing on the
function c p,s for the solid temperature range, the experimental data show a solid-solid phase transition
at 276 ◦C. This phase transition is not reproduced in the simple linear approximation because the cyclic
operation temperature is higher. For the melting zone, the specific heat capacity consists of the sensible
c p,m and the equivalent specific heat capacity c∗p . Both together form a peak similar to the experimental
data, but the peak is shifted to 306 ◦C in the model. This difference may be a result of the heating rate
during the DSC measurement. To fulfill the physical specification of the melting point, the shifting
seems to be acceptable. The heights of the peaks are similar; in the model it depends mainly on the
melting-range temperatures and the latent heat of fusion. This method can be easily adapted for other
materials when the enthalpy of fusion and the melting point are known.
To determine the enthalpy function, the c p,app function must be integrated. Compared to other
approaches, the polynomial functions can be integrated without great effort. The reference temperature
is 0 ◦C for the present investigation. The enthalpy function h( T ) persists of three individual polynomial
functions for the solid, the melting, and the liquid temperature range. With this enthalpy function, the
energy balance of the TES in Section 3.5 was calculated.
A comparison of the polynomial approach with the error function approach in [43] is provided
in Figure 5. The liquid fraction applied for sodium nitrate shows a similar trend; the polynomial
approach has slightly different gradients, compared to the error function.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 9 of 19

Figure 4. Apparent specific heat capacity c p,app for sodium nitrate.

Figure 5. Liquid fraction γ comparison for sodium nitrate.

2.4. Heat Transmission from the HTF into the PCM

To describe the heat transmission from the HTF into the PCM, a scheme is presented in Figure 6.
In the steel tube, the HTF temperature is measured at the inlet THTF1 and the outlet THTF2 . A mean
HTF temperature can be determined. From the HTF to the steel tube, an inner heat-transfer coefficient
αi was calculated as described in [48] for a flow in a tube, depending on the velocity and the HTF
properties. For the experimental setup, the flow was turbulent with Reynolds numbers greater than
2300. The material properties of the HTF were taken from the manufacturer data-sheet [49]. The heat
conduction in the steel tube can be calculated straightforwardly. For the heat transfer on the outer side
of the steel tube, an apparent heat-transfer coefficient α f ins is introduced. It mainly depends on the
fin geometry and the phase-transition state, which must be considered for the values provided in the
results section.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 10 of 19

Figure 6. Heat transmission scheme.

On the PCM side, a mean storage temperature is introduced. The radial discretization of the
PCM into four circular rings, together with the measured temperatures at the element borders, allow
calculation of the weighted average temperature:

∑dj=a Tj m j
TPCM = Tm = (14)
m PCM

The heat flux can be calculated as follows:

PHTF = ṁ [h HTF ( THTF1 ) − h HTF ( THTF2 )] (15)

For the heat conduction in a cylinder with the length l and one layer provided in [48], the heat
flux can be written as:
2π ( THTF − Tm)
PHTF = 1 (16)
rα + 2λ
1
ln( rroi ) + ro α1
i i steel f ins

Assuming that α f ins can be determined now, the exact trend is provided in the result section.
Values for the inner heat transmission αi coefficient vary between 1000 and 4000 W m−2 K for the
different mass flows of 1 kg s−1 –3 kg s−1 and the different HTF temperatures. For the heat conduction
coefficient of steel λsteel , 50 W m−1 K was chosen. This value has no significant influence on the overall
heat transmission. Values for α f ins are in the range of 300 W m−2 to 1500 W m−2 , depending on the
mean storage temperature. For the case of low-HTF velocities, the inner heat-transfer coefficient can
become much lower so the inner heat-transfer could become the crucial value. With the measured
values for the apparent heat transfer on the outer side of the steel tube, an extrapolation to similar
geometries and higher storage capacities can be done and the power trend for comparable storage
types can be predicted. Up-scaling the actual lab-scale test rig to industrial-scale TES is viable.

3. Results

3.1. Temperature Distribution in the Storage with the Combination of Transversal and Longitudinal Fins
The temperature distribution in the PCM is measured in four mean radial positions (Tm a -Tmd ).
Figure 7 shows their temperature trend. From this data, a typical temperature trend for TES with
PCM can be deviated, especially for discharging, which takes place from 0 to 6 h. The temperature
gradient at the melting temperature of the PCM (306 ◦C) is zero; in this period, the phase change occurs
at the specific measuring point. The phase-change time increases for the outer positions (Tmc and
Tmd ) due to more PCM mass. For charging, this effect cannot be seen so clearly, especially looking at
positions Tmc and Tmd . A possible explanation for these results may be the stronger natural convection
in the liquid PCM during melting in this region. It is possible that the finned area (Tm a and Tmb )
limits natural convection, and therefore the melting point can be seen more clearly in this trend. This
effect is supported by the results of numerical investigations in which fins hinder the flow of the
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 11 of 19

liquid PCM [50]. The melting and solidification starts from the inside and moves to the outer shell.
Interestingly, the process velocity differs, while for melting, the temperature Tmd converges to a
stationary value after six hours. It is not stationary after six hours of discharging. The solidification
process of the PCM takes more time than the melting, which confirms numerical simulation as in [29]
and former measurements as in [23].

Figure 7. Radial temperature distribution in the PCM.

In the axial direction, the vessel is split into five vertical sections by transversal fins. These sections
are equipped with different measuring points to examine the uniformity of distribution within the
sections but also over the total height of the storage. Therefore, the temperatures within the sections
are averaged and displayed in Figure 8. The mean temperatures in the particular sections do not
spread much. Interestingly, the temperatures Tm1 and Tm5 have the highest deviation; all others show
a uniform trend. It is not difficult to explain this behavior, since the two temperatures represent the
lower and upper end of the vessel. Boundary conditions such as the difference in insulation or the
air layer in Section 5 over the PCM are likely reasons for the deviation. The vessel is mounted to
a steel construction at the top of Section 5 (see Figure 2), so the insulation differs to other sections.
Nonetheless, these results indicate a uniform temperature distribution over the whole vessel in axial
direction, which is contrary to former experimental investigations with plain longitudinal vertical
fins [23].

Figure 8. Axial temperature distribution in the PCM.

Energies 2019, 12, 1264 12 of 19

3.2. Axial Temperature Distribution in a Vertical Section

Another important finding is that the axial temperature distribution on a local level is different to
the global axial distribution mentioned above. In each section, the temperature is measured in different
heights and different radial distances. Therefore, in the position Ta three measuring points exist in
each section, for example Ta3_2 is the middle one in the third section in the radial position a. Out of the
five sections, the mean temperature for the three axial positions in one section were calculated and
are presented in Figure 9. From the graph, it can be seen that the temperatures are mostly uniform
beside the time from 7 to 9.5 h. In this period the PCM temperature is in a range of 306 to 325 ◦C
and the PCM is in the liquid phase. Furthermore, the temperature gradient between the PCM and
the HTF is high; hot and liquid PCM accumulates at the top of each section. Natural convection
plays a non-negligible role in the heat-transfer mechanism during melting, as previously described
by Walter in [29]. For solidification, the axial temperature distribution is uniform, heat conduction
is the dominating and limiting factor for the heat transmission. However, findings of the current
experimental investigation support the previous numerical simulations.

Figure 9. Axial temperature distribution in the PCM in a section.

3.3. Comparison of Different fin Geometries

A prior experimental investigation with a comparable test rig but plain vertical longitudinal
fins was carried out in 2017. To compare the effectiveness of the two different fin types, the mean
storage temperature and the power rate is presented in Figure 10. It is apparent that the mean storage
temperature trend Tm while discharging is similar for both fin types. The plain longitudinal fins seem
to be a little bit faster, but the maximum storage temperature therefore is lower. A significant difference
can be observed while charging; Tmnew f ins has a higher gradient and reaches a higher level. 325 ◦C
of mean storage temperature reached 32% faster with the new fin type. Turning now to the power
rate, a significant difference can be observed for both charging and discharging. During solidification,
the power rate is consequently higher with the new fin type. Interestingly, the charging process can be
completed much faster, the mean storage temperature reaches a higher level faster, and then the power
rate decreases rapidly (from 9 to 10 h).
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 13 of 19

Figure 10. Comparison of different fin types.

3.4. Apparent Heat-Transfer Coefficient α f ins

The heat transmission from the HTF into the PCM or the reverse can be split up into different
sub-areas and effects. In the HTF tube, the heat-transfer coefficient αi from the fluid to the wall depends
mainly on the fluid velocity and material properties. For the steel tube, heat conduction normally is
high compared to the PCM. On the outer side of the steel tube, an apparent heat-transfer coefficient
α f ins can be determined. This parameter is valid for the specific geometry and material combination
and is presented in Figure 11. In the chart, the apparent heat-transfer coefficients for the two different
fin geometries are compared. It can be seen that the value for the new fin type is significantly higher
than the other one, especially in the more important first three hours of charging and discharging.
As can be seen in Figure 10, the mean storage temperature for the new fins and charging approaches an
asymptotic temperature after 9 h. That means that the storage is almost charged after half the charging
time. The temperature difference between inlet and outlet becomes small and the values for α f ins
spread, as can be seen in Figure 11. Summing up, the heat-transfer coefficients are essential for the
duration of charging and discharging but not for the asymptotic steady state.

Figure 11. Apparent heat-transfer coefficient.

Energies 2019, 12, 1264 14 of 19

3.5. Energy Balance—Capacities and Losses

Turning now to the energy balance of the storage vessel, Figure 12 provides energy and power
trends to compare the stored energy from an HTF-based perspective with an PCM-based perspective.
The HTF temperatures at the inlet and outlet (THTF1 and THTF2 ) together with the measured mass
flow result in the power which is displayed as a black dashed line. Integration of the HTF-based
power gives the energy, a black full line in the chart. The storage consists of the PCM, a steel vessel,
and aluminum fins. Furthermore, losses will appear in the energy balance, based on the insulation
thickness, storage temperature, and the cycle time. The temperatures for all components are measured,
integrated over the time, and, together with the different enthalpies, the energy for the whole storage
can be presented (Estorage , the red full line). This energy consists of the particular energy expression for
the steel, aluminum, and the losses. Complying with the energy balance means that the red and the
black lines are supposed to have the same trend and end up at the same value after a cycle. Interestingly,
for charging, the two lines have a similar trend, and the deviation is low. For discharging, the trends
show a higher deviation. The difference in energy between storage- and HTF-based calculations at the
end of charging/discharging is relatively low for experimental investigations. Several limitations may
affect the trend. One is the fault tolerance of the thermocouples in the HTF and the mass flow sensor.
Another one is the limited radial temperature resolution to four sensor layers (Ta to Td ). Therefore,
the temperature distribution in the PCM is probably not detailed enough. The PCM-stored energy
is the biggest share, so the PCM temperature has a significant influence on the energy. Steel and
aluminum masses do not play a huge role in the energy balance and the losses mainly depend on the
insulation thickness. For a more detailed picture, the PCM temperature distribution must be measured
with a higher resolution—more radially distributed thermocouples.

Figure 12. Energy balance.

4. Discussion
Focusing on the radial temperature trends in Figure 7, it can be summarized that naturally the
melting occurs radially from the inside to the outside. For the positions Tm a and Tmb in the finned
zone, the melting and solidification happens faster for the outer testing points Tmc and Tmd . From
a global axial perspective, the mean temperatures in the particular sections do not diverge much in
Figure 8; axial uniformly melting occurs. Looking at one individual section in Figure 9, the temperature
at the top of the section is higher than at the bottom. The non-uniform temperature distribution over
the whole storage in [23] can only be observed now in the individual sections. For a comparison of
the two different fin geometries, the mean storage PCM temperature Tm was calculated for both in
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 15 of 19

Figure 10. A 32% faster melting can be seen. The power rate for the novel fin geometry is consequently
higher with the new fin type. Regarding the heat-transfer coefficient α f ins in Figure 11, higher values
can be obtained throughout the cycle. Melting and solidification of the PCM and the heat transfer
are highly transient processes, so the heat-transfer coefficient at the outer diameter of the HTF steel
tube, as described in the methods sections above, can be stated as a function from the mean PCM
temperature in the storage. Therefore, average values between 400 W m−2 K−1 for the solid PCM
and 1500 W m−2 K−1 for the liquid PCM can be expected for the present configuration. Based on
that values, the TES behavior can be predicted for utility scale TES systems with the fin geometry
proposed in this investigation. Therefore, the inner heat transfer in the tube cannot be neglected.
For low flow velocities, this value can become critically low, but compared to the heat transfer from
the tube to the PCM, numerical correlations are available. Finally, the energy balance for the whole
storage system was determined to examine the validity of the results in Figure 12. The losses to the
surrounding as well as the heat capacities of the aluminum and the steel were considered. Together
with the heat capacity of the PCM and the measured temperatures, the delivered heat from the HTF
fluid can be compared with the temperature rise in the PCM, aluminum, and steel. The deviation
between EHTF and EStorage can be interpreted as measurement deviations and deviations based on the
discretized resolution of the temperature testing points. The fit between the two curves is satisfying
considering the experimental setup behind the data and it seems to be physically plausible. Again,
the main findings:

• The combination of transversal and longitudinal fins leads to global axially symmetric melting.
• The combination of transversal and longitudinal fins leads to 32% faster melting compared to
plain longitudinal fins.
• Apparent heat-transfer coefficients between 400 and 1500 W m−2 K−1 could be determined
• A simple method for the enthalpy function of sodium nitrate in the melting range is presented,
based on an apparent specific heat capacity function.

Future research directions should deal with a description of the PCM state depending on a
measurable quantity such as the PCM temperature. With this correlation, the charging state of PCM
storage can be described and power and capacity predicted. The heat-transfer coefficient formulation
can be adapted to a more general formulation, including the fin geometry in the description.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.H. and H.M.; methodology, H.W. and G.S.-U.; software, G.S.-U.;
validation, G.S.-U.; formal analysis, G.S.-U.; investigation, G.S.-U.; resources, G.S.-U.; data curation, G.S.-U.;
writing—original draft preparation, G.S.-U.; writing—review and editing, H.W. and M.H.; visualization, G.S.-U.;
supervision, H.W.; project administration, H.W.; funding acquisition, M.H. and H.W.
Funding: This research was funded by Austrian Research Promotion Agency (Österreichische Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft,
FFG) grant number 836636.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
publish the results.

Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
CSP Concentrating solar power
DSC Differential scanning calorimetry
HTF Heat-transfer fluid
PCM Phase-change material
TES Thermal energy storage
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 16 of 19

Nomenclature

Latin symbols
cp specific heat capacity (kJ kg−1 K−1 )
c∗p equivalent specific heat capacity (kJ kg−1 K−1 )
E Energy (kW h)
c p,app apparent specific heat capacity (kJ kg−1 K−1 )
h specific enthalpy (kJ kg−1 )
L Latent heat of fusion (kJ kg−1 )
P Power (kW)
ṁ HTF mass flow (kg s−1 )
T Temperature (◦C)
∆T Temperature spread (◦C)
t time (h)
Tm Mean PCM temperature of the storage (◦C)

Greek symbols
α Heat-transfer coefficient (W m−2 K−1 )
γ Liquid fraction (-)
λ Heat conduction coefficient (W m−1 K−1 )

Subscripts
a-d Temperature subscript: Radial position of thermocouples
a-e Polynomial coefficients for the equivalent specific heat capacity
cen centered
ch charging
dis discharging
erf error function
1–5 Sections 1–5
fins parameter valid for this fin type
HTF Heat-transfer fluid
HFT1 HTF position at the bottom/inlet of the storage
HFT2 HTF position at the top/outlet of the storage
i referring to the inside of the HTF tube
l Liquid
lrv lower range validity
melt Melting temperature
m Melting range
newfins New fin geometry
oldfins Old fin geometry
poly polynomial function
ref reference
s Solid
sens Sensible
storage Storage including PCM, steel and aluminum
urv upper range validity

References
1. Ioan Sarbu and Calin Sebarchievici. A Comprehensive Review of Thermal Energy Storage. Sustainability
2018, 10, 191. [CrossRef]
2. IRENA. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017: International Renewable Energy Agency; IRENA: Abu Dhabi,
UAE, 2018.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 17 of 19

3. U.S. Department of Energy. DOE Global Energy Storage Database; U.S. Department of Energy: Washington,
DC, USA, 2018.
4. Liu, M.; Steven Tay, N.H.; Bell, S.; Belusko, M.; Jacob, R.; Will, G.; Saman, W.; Bruno, F. Review on
concentrating solar power plants and new developments in high temperature thermal energy storage
technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 53, 1411–1432. [CrossRef]
5. Qiu, S.; Solomon, L.; Rinker, G. Development of an Integrated Thermal Energy Storage and Free-Piston
Stirling Generator for a Concentrating Solar Power System. Energies 2017, 10, 1361. [CrossRef]
6. Riahi, S.; Jovet, Y.; Saman, W.Y.; Belusko, M.; Bruno, F. Sensible and latent heat energy storage systems for
concentrated solar power plants, exergy efficiency comparison. Solar Energy 2019, 180, 104–115. [CrossRef]
7. de La Calle, A.; Bayon, A.; Hinkley, J.; Pye, J. System-level simulation of a novel solar power tower plant
based on a sodium receiver, PCM storage and sCO2 power block. AIP Conf. Proc. 2018, 2033, 210003.
[CrossRef]
8. Bayon, A.; Liu, M.; Sergeev, D.; Grigore, M.; Bruno, F.; Müller, M. Novel solid–solid phase-change
cascade systems for high-temperature thermal energy storage. Solar Energy 2019, 177, 274–283,
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2018.10.085. [CrossRef]
9. Groulx, D. The rate problem in solid-liquid phase change heat transfer: Efforts and questions towards
heat exchanger design rules. In Proceedings of the 16th International Heat Transfer Conference (IHTC-16),
International Heat Transfer Conferences, Beijing, China, 10–16 August 2018.
10. Nazir, H.; Batool, M.; Bolivar Osorio, F.J.; Isaza-Ruiz, M.; Xu, X.; Vignarooban, K.; Phelan, P.; Inamuddin;
Kannan, A.M. Recent developments in phase change materials for energy storage applications: A review.
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 2019, 129, 491–523. [CrossRef]
11. Agyenim, F.; Hewitt, N.; Eames, P.; Smyth, M. A review of materials, heat transfer and phase change
problem formulation for latent heat thermal energy storage systems (LHTESS). Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2010, 14, 615–628, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.015. [CrossRef]
12. Sharma, S.D.; Sagara, K. Latent Heat Storage Materials and Systems: A Review. Int. J. Green Energy
2005, 2, 1–56, doi:10.1081/GE-200051299. [CrossRef]
13. Höhlein, S.; König-Haagen, A.; Brüggemann, D. Macro-Encapsulation of Inorganic Phase-Change Materials
(PCM) in Metal Capsules. Materials 2018, 11, 1752, doi:10.3390/ma11091752. [CrossRef]
14. Alam, T.E.; Dhau, J.S.; Goswami, D.Y.; Stefanakos, E. Macroencapsulation and characterization of
phase change materials for latent heat thermal energy storage systems. Appl. Energy 2015, 154, 92–101,
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.04.086. [CrossRef]
15. Zhang, H.; Balram, A.; Tiznobaik, H.; Shin, D.; Santhanagopalan, S. Microencapsulation of molten salt in
stable silica shell via a water-limited sol-gel process for high temperature thermal energy storage. Appl.
Therm. Eng. 2018, 136, 268–274, doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.02.050. [CrossRef]
16. Hu, Y.; He, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Wen, D. Effect of Al2 O3 nanoparticle dispersion on the specific heat capacity of
a eutectic binary nitrate salt for solar power applications. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 142, 366–373,
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2017.03.062. [CrossRef]
17. Buonomo, B.; Di Pasqua, A.; Ercole, D.; Manca, O. Numerical Study of Latent Heat Thermal Energy Storage
Enhancement by Nano-PCM in Aluminum Foam. Inventions 2018, 3, 76, doi:10.3390/inventions3040076.
[CrossRef]
18. Martin, V.; He, B.; Setterwall, F. Direct contact PCM–water cold storage. Appl. Energy 2010, 87, 2652–2659,
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.01.005. [CrossRef]
19. Zipf, V.; Neuhäuser, A.; Willert, D.; Nitz, P.; Gschwander, S.; Platzer, W. High temperature latent
heat storage with a screw heat exchanger: Design of prototype. Appl. Energy 2013, 109, 462–469,
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.11.044. [CrossRef]
20. Tay, N.; Liu, M.; Belusko, M.; Bruno, F. Review on transportable phase change material in thermal energy
storage systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 75, 264–277, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.10.069. [CrossRef]
21. Laing, D.; Bauer, T.; Breidenbach, N.; Hachmann, B.; Johnson, M. Development of high temperature
phase-change-material storages. Appl. Energy 2013, 109, 497–504, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.11.063.
[CrossRef]
22. Prötsch, A. Auslegung und Inbetriebnahme einer Latentwärmespeicherversuchsanlage. Master’s Thesis,
TU Wien, Wien, Austria, 2012.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 18 of 19

23. Urschitz, G.; Walter, H.; Hameter, M. Laboratory Test Rig of a LHTES (Latent Heat Thermal Energy Storage):
Construction and First Experimental Results. J. Energy Power Eng. 2014, 8, 1838–1847.
24. Pizzolato, A.; Sharma, A.; Maute, K.; Sciacovelli, A.; Verda, V. Design of effective fins for fast PCM melting
and solidification in shell-and-tube latent heat thermal energy storage through topology optimization. Appl.
Energy 2017, 208, 210–227, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.050. [CrossRef]
25. Sciacovelli, A.; Gagliardi, F.; Verda, V. Maximization of performance of a PCM latent heat storage system
with innovative fins. Appl. Energy 2015, 137, 707–715, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.07.015. [CrossRef]
26. Eslamnezhad, H.; Rahimi, A.B. Enhance heat transfer for phase-change materials in triplex tube heat
exchanger with selected arrangements of fins. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 113, 813–821. [CrossRef]
27. Kuboth, S.; König-Haagen, A.; Brüggemann, D. Numerical Analysis of Shell-and-Tube Type Latent
Thermal Energy Storage Performance with Different Arrangements of Circular Fins. Energies 2017, 10, 274,
doi:10.3390/en10030274. [CrossRef]
28. Tay, N.; Bruno, F.; Belusko, M. Comparison of pinned and finned tubes in a phase change thermal energy
storage system using CFD. Appl. Energy 2013, 104, 79–86, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.10.040. [CrossRef]
29. Walter, H.; Beck, A.; Hameter, M. Influence of the Fin Design on the Melting and Solidification Process of
NaNO3 in a Thermal Energy Storage System. J. Energy Power Eng. 2015, 9. [CrossRef]
30. Koller, M.; Beck, A.; Walter, H.; Hameter, M. Comparison of Different Heat Exchanger Tube Designs
used in Latent Heat Thermal Energy Storage Systems—A Numerical Study. In Comparison of Different
Heat Exchanger Tube De- Signs Used in Latent Heat Thermal Energy Storage Systems—A Numerical Study;
Koller, M., Beck, A., Walter, H., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; Volume 38, pp. 277–282.
doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-63428-3.50051-5.
31. Sciacovelli, A.; Verda, V.; Colella, F. Numerical Investigation on the Thermal Performance Enhancement in a
Latent Heat Thermal Storage Unit. In ASME 2012 11th Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and
Analysis; ASME: New York, NY, USA, 2012; p. 543. doi:10.1115/ESDA2012-82720.
32. Qiu, S.; Solomon, L.; Fang, M. Study of Material Compatibility for a Thermal Energy Storage System with
Phase Change Material. Energies 2018, 11, 572, doi:10.3390/en11030572. [CrossRef]
33. Urschitz, G.; Walter, H.; Brier, J. Experimental investigation on bimetallic tube compositions for
the use in latent heat thermal energy storage units. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 125, 368–378,
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2016.05.054. [CrossRef]
34. Johnson, M.; Hübner, S.; Braun, M.; Martin, C.; Fiß, M.; Hachmann, B.; Schönberger, M.; Eck, M. Assembly
and attachment methods for extended aluminum fins onto steel tubes for high temperature latent heat
storage units. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2018, 144, 96–105, doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.08.035. [CrossRef]
35. Benlekkam, M.L.; Nehari, D.; Cheriet, N. Numerical investigation of latent heat thermal energy storage
system. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2018, doi:10.5281/ZENODO.1490505. [CrossRef]
36. Gasia, J.; Martin, M.; Solé, A.; Barreneche, C.; Cabeza, L. Phase Change Material Selection for
Thermal Processes Working under Partial Load Operating Conditions in the Temperature Range between
120 ◦C and 200 ◦C. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 722, doi:10.3390/app7070722. [CrossRef]
37. Maldonado, J.; Fullana-Puig, M.; Martín, M.; Solé, A.; Fernández, Á.; de Gracia, A.; Cabeza, L. Phase
Change Material Selection for Thermal Energy Storage at High Temperature Range between 210 ◦C and
270 ◦C. Energies 2018, 11, 861, doi:10.3390/en11040861. [CrossRef]
38. Kargar, M.R.; Baniasadi, E.; Mosharaf-Dehkordi, M. Numerical analysis of a new thermal energy storage
system using phase change materials for direct steam parabolic trough solar power plants. Solar Energy
2018, 170, 594–605, doi:10.1016/j.solener.2018.06.024. [CrossRef]
39. Cabeza, L.F.; Tay, N.H.S. (Eds.) High-Temperature Thermal Storage Systems Using Phase Change Materials;
Academic Press: London, UK, 2018.
40. Urschitz, G.; Hameter, M.; Illyés, V.; Walter, H. Experimental Investigation on a High Temperature Latent
TES with Novel Fin Geometry. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Sustainable Development of Energy,
Water and Environment System—SDEWES, Palermo, Italy, 27 September–4 October 2018; pp. 392–404.
41. DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung. Industrielle Platin-Widerstandsthermometer und Platin-Temperatursensoren
(IEC 60751:2008); Deutsche Fassung EN 60751:2008; DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung:
Berlin, Germany, 2009.
42. Bauernfeind, T. Untersuchungen zur thermischen Energiespeicherung an einem Latentwärmespeicher-Einrohr-System
(LESY 2). Master’s Thesis, TU Wien, Wien, Austria, 2018.
Energies 2019, 12, 1264 19 of 19

43. Rösler, F.; Brüggemann, D. Shell-and-tube type latent heat thermal energy storage: Numerical analysis
and comparison with experiments. Heat Mass Transfer 2011, 47, 1027–1033, doi:10.1007/s00231-011-0866-9.
[CrossRef]
44. Lager, D. Evaluation of Thermophysical Properties for Thermal Energy Storage Materials—Determining
Factors, Prospects and Limitations. Ph.D. Thesis, TU Wien, Wien, Austria, 2017.
45. Carling, R.E. Heat capacities of NaNO3 and KNO3 from 350 to 800 K. Thermochim. Acta 1983, 60, 265–275.
[CrossRef]
46. Jriri, T.; Rogez, J.; Bergman, C.; Mathieu, J.C. Thermodynamic study of the condensed phases of
Thermodynamic study of the condensed phases of NaNO3, KNO3 and CsNO3 and their transitions.
Thermochim. Acta 1995, 266, 147–161. [CrossRef]
47. Bauer, T.; Laing, D.; Kröner, U. Sodium nitrate for high temperature latent heat storage. In Proceedings of
the Thermal Energy Storage for Efficiency and Sustainability: 11th International Conference on Thermal
Energy Storage, Effstock, Sweden, 14–17 July 2009.
48. VDI-Gesellschaft (Ed.) VDI Heat Atlas, 2nd ed.; VDI Buch; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010.
doi:10.1007/978-3-540-77877-6.
49. Therminol R
VP-1 Heat Transfer Fluid. Available online: https://www.therminol.com/products/Therminol-
VP1 (accessed on 25 February 2019).
50. Böswarth, M. Numerische Simulation des Schmelz- und Erstarrungsprozesses in einem Latentwärmespeicher
mit Rippenrohren. Master’s Thesis, TU Wien, Wien, Austria, 2017.

c 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).