Solar Energy Vol. 70, No. 1, pp.

51–61, 2001
 2001 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd
Pergamon PII: S0038 – 092X( 00 )00112 – 2 Printed in Great Britain
0038-092X / 01 / $ - see front matter
www.elsevier.com / locate / solener

AN ANALYSIS OF ISOTHERMAL PHASE CHANGE OF PHASE CHANGE

MATERIAL WITHIN RECTANGULAR AND CYLINDRICAL CONTAINERS
B. ZIVKOVIC and I. FUJII †,1
Meiji University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 1-1-1 Higashi-Mita, Tama-ku, 214-8571
Kawasaki, Japan

Received 10 January 2000; revised version accepted 7 June 2000

Communicated by ERICH HAHNE

Abstract—In this paper, a simple computational model for isothermal phase change of phase change material
(PCM) encapsulated in a single container is presented. The mathematical model was based on an enthalpy
formulation with equations cast in such a form that the only unknown variable is the PCM’s temperature. The
theoretical model was verified with a test problem and an experiment performed in order to assess the validity
of the assumptions of the mathematical model. With very good agreement between experimental and
computational data, it can be concluded that conduction within the PCM in the direction of heat transfer fluid
flow, thermal resistance of the container’s wall, and the effects of natural convection within the melt can be
ignored for the conditions investigated in this study. The numerical analysis of the melting time for rectangular
and cylindrical containers was then performed using the computational model presented in this paper. Results
show that the rectangular container requires nearly half of the melting time as for the cylindrical container of
the same volume and heat transfer area.  2001 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

1. INTRODUCTION Ghoneim, 1989). Using the shell-and-tube model

for the LHES unit, Morrison and Abdel-Khalik
Effective and economic thermal energy storage of
(1978) performed a long-term analysis of air-
a daily surplus of irradiated solar energy is an
based (air as HTF) and liquid-based (water as
unavoidable necessity for the efficient use of solar
HTF) solar heating systems, assuming that the
energy for heating purposes (Duffie and Beck-
thermal conductivity of the PCM in the direction
man, 1991). Among the various methods of
of the HTF flow, as well as the thermal resistance
energy storage, latent heat thermal energy storage
of the PCM in the direction normal to the HTF
is particularly attractive. The motivation for using
flow, can both be ignored. In a later analysis,
phase change materials (PCM) is their high
Ghoneim (1989) took into account both the
energy storage density and their ability to provide
conduction within the PCM in the direction of the
heat at a constant temperature (Abhat, 1983).
HTF flow and the direction normal to the HTF
In order to perform a long-term performance
flow and showed that a substantial error in
analysis of a specified solar heating system, an
estimating the solar fraction (amount of total
adequate model of the heat storage unit is needed
heating load supplied by solar energy) was intro-
(Klein et al., 1976) which, naturally, depends on
duced by neglecting the conduction within the
its design. A survey of the previously published
PCM. However, the common conclusion from
papers dealing with latent heat storage reveals that
both works is that the reduction in storage volume
the most intensively analyzed latent heat energy
by using PCM is not as nearly as pronounced for
storage (LHES) unit is the shell-and-tube LHES
liquid-based systems as it is for air-based systems.
unit with the PCM filling the shell and the heat
It is, therefore, preferable to use a LHES unit
transfer fluid (HTF) flowing through the tubes
coupled with an air-based system. For that reason,
(Lacroix, 1993; Bansal and Buddhi, 1992; Esen et
air is considered as the HTF in the subsequent
al., 1998; Soma and Dutta, 1993; Ismail and
analysis.
Alves, 1986) or, vice versa, PCM filling the tube
The problem of the phase change of PCMs falls
and HTF flowing parallel to it (Esen et al., 1998;
into the category of moving boundary problems.
When the PCM changes state, both liquid and
†
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel. / solid phases are present and they are separated by
fax: 181-44-943-7395; e-mail: fujii@isc.meiji.ac.jp the moving interface between them. There have
1
ISES member. been many different numerical methods de-

51
52 B. Zivkovic and I. Fujii
veloped for dealing with the phase change prob-
lem (Bansal and Buddhi, 1992; Soma and Dutta,
1993; Murray and Landis, 1959) of which the
most attractive and commonly used are the so-
called enthalpy methods (Voller and Cross, 1981;
Voller, 1985; Voller, 1990). The major reason for
this is that the method does not require explicit
treatment of the conditions on the phase change
boundary (cf. Carslaw and Jaeger, 1959), i.e. there
is no need for tracking the phase change boundary
throughout the phase change domain. However,
beside the fact that implicit finite difference
discretization results in a set of nonlinear equa-
tions, the method has several other drawbacks.
These are the quite cumbersome calculation of
liquid fraction updates and the fact that the
temperature field within the PCM is not calculated
explicitly but via enthalpy-temperature correla-
tion. In this paper, a slightly modified enthalpy
method, which enables decoupling of temperature
and liquid fraction fields, is presented. Derivation
of discretization equations is straightforward and
the method itself is very easy to implement.
2. MATHEMATICAL MODEL
The subject of the present investigation is a
single container filled with PCM (Fig. 1). Packing
the PCM in single containers enables modular
construction of the LHES unit and is also very
economic from the viewpoint of mass production.
Moreover, complete melting of the PCM, which is
absolutely necessary for long-term (seasonal) heat
storage (Zivkovic and Fujii, 1999), is difficult to
obtain using a shell-and-tube LHES unit where
large masses of the PCM are involved.
There are several approaches to the mathemati-
cal modeling of LHES units. In some models,
conduction within the PCM in both the direction
of the HTF flow and the direction normal to the
HTF flow are taken into account (Lacroix, 1993;
Ghoneim, 1989), while in others the effect of
natural convection within the molten PCM is also
Fig. 1. Geometry of the rectangular container.
accounted for (Voller et al., 1987; Lacroix, 1993;
Soma and Dutta, 1993). While in most works,
convective heat transfer from the HTF to the
PCM is calculated through the mean value of the
heat transfer coefficient (aconv ), some authors
solved the problem of phase change coupled with
transient convective heat transfer between HTF
and PCM, i.e. with the complete Oberbeck’s set
of equations solved for the HTF (Belleci and
Conti, 1993; Trp et al., 1999).
In the present analysis, the mathematical model
for phase change of the encapsulated PCM is
derived under the following assumptions:
(A) Thermal conductivity of the PCM in the
direction of the HTF flow is ignored.
(B) The effects of natural convection within the
melt are negligible and can be ignored.
(C) The PCM behaves ideally, i.e. such phe-
nomena as property degradation and supercooling
are not accounted for.
(D) The PCM is assumed to have a definite
melting point (isothermal phase change).
(E) Thermophysical properties of the PCM are
different for the solid and liquid phases but are
independent of temperature.
(F) The PCM is homogeneous and isotropic.
(G) Thermal resistance across the wall of the
container is neglected.
(H) Lateral sides of the rectangular container
are well insulated, i.e. heat transfer occurs only on
sides x 5 0 and x 5 d (cf. Fig. 1).
In order to validate the first assumption (A), the
influence of the conduction within the PCM in the
direction of HTF flow was numerically investi-
gated in the following way. Retaining all the
above assumptions and neglecting the conduction
within the PCM in the direction normal to the
HTF flow, the governing equations for heat
transfer and phase change can be written as:
≠H ≠ k ≠T
]5] ] ]
≠t ≠z r ≠z S D (1)
≠T air
mf c pf ]] 5 aconv A htsT 2 T aird (2)
≠z
where all the variables are defined in the nomen-
clature table. Detailed description of the numeri-
cal solution of the above set of equations is
omitted as it is described later in the paper. Here,
only the results obtained are discussed briefly.
Even though conduction within the PCM in the
direction of HTF flow plays an important role for
long LHES units (containers) and relatively high
convective heat transfer coefficients (Fig. 2), its
influence can be ignored (Fig. 3) for low convec-
 An analysis of isothermal phase change of phase change material within rectangular and cylindrical containers 53

Fig. 2. Temperature variation within the PCM in the direction of the HTF flow for l53 m and aconv 5300 W/ m 2 K.

tive heat transfer coefficients (such are those when With the foregoing assumptions, the enthalpy
air is used as the HTF) and relatively short formulation for the conduction-controlled phase
containers (from 200 to 400 mm). Furthermore, change can be written as (Voller, 1990; Voller et
comparison of the solution obtained using the al., 1987):
mathematical model defined with the set of Eqs.
(1) and (2) and the solution obtained solving the
same problem using the lumped mass method
≠H k
S
] 5 div ] grad T
≠t r D (3)
shows that no significant improvement of the
results is obtained if the conduction within the An alternative form of Eq. (3) can be obtained by
PCM is accounted for (Fig. 4). These results are splitting the total enthalpy H into sensible and
in accordance with the results obtained by latent heat components:
Ghoneim (1989), who concluded that there is no H 5 h 1 L ? fl (4)
significant change in the prediction of the solar
fraction with reduction of Dz to less than 200 mm. where

Fig. 3. Temperature variation within the PCM in the direction of the HTF flow for l50.314 m and aconv 515.5 W/ m 2 K.
54 B. Zivkovic and I. Fujii

Fig. 4. Comparison between the lumped mass method and the case when the axial conduction is accounted for.

h5 E c dT (5)
≠h ≠ k ≠T
S D
≠f
] 5 ] ] ] 2 L ]l
≠t ≠x r ≠x ≠t
(8)
Tm

The fully implicit discretization equation for an

and T m is the melting temperature of the PCM.
internal node ‘i’ can be written as (Fig. 5):
For the problem of isothermal phase change, the
local liquid fraction fl is defined as: ≠fl
≠h i k
] 5 ]]2 sT i 21 2 2T i 1 T i 11d 2 L ]i (9)
fl (T ) 5 H
1 if T . T m
0 if T , T m
(6)
≠t r Dx ≠t

where the sensible enthalpy term and liquid

Substituting Eq. (4) into Eq. (3) gives:
≠h
≠t
k
r S ≠f
] 5 div ] grad T 2 L ]l
≠t D
Eq. (7) represents, together with Eqs. (5) and (6)
and the appropriate initial and boundary con-
ditions, the mathematical model of conduction
controlled isothermal phase change.
3. NUMERICAL SOLUTION
For the problem of one-dimensional isothermal
phase change of the PCM encapsulated within a
rectangular container (Fig. 1), the governing
equation for the PCM follows from Eq. (7):
fraction term are deliberately left in the differen-
tial form for the convenience of subsequent
(7) numerical computation. It should be noted that the
discretization equations for boundary nodes de-
pend on specific boundary conditions and are
derived from an energy balance on boundary
control volumes.
The key feature of the proposed method is the
fact that for an isothermal phase change (which is
the case for most salt hydrates), the temperature
of the PCM within a given control volume
remains constant and equal to its melting tempera-
ture until the PCM has melted completely. Con-
sider first the case when control volume ‘‘i‘ is
fully solid or fully liquid. In that case, from the

Fig. 5. Discretization domain for a one-dimensional phase change problem.

 An analysis of isothermal phase change of phase change material within rectangular and cylindrical containers 55

definition of sensible enthalpy, Eq. (5), and the k Dt

liquid fraction, Eq. (6), it follows that: fl i 5 f old
l i 1 ]] sT 2 2T m 1 T i 11d (18)
r L Dx 2 i 21
≠h ≠T
]i ; c ]i (10) which is the equation for updating the liquid
≠t ≠t fraction field within the control volume that is
and undergoing a phase change. As Eq. (15) shows,
liquid fractions are updated from the temperature
≠fl field and not from the sensible enthalpy field
]i ; 0 (11)
≠t (Voller, 1990; Lacroix, 1993). The temperature
and the liquid fraction field are decoupled, the
where c is the specific heat of the solid or liquid
temperature field within the PCM being calculated
phase, depending on state of the control volume.
independently from Eq. (13) forcing a i 2 1 5
After introducing Eqs. (10) and (11), Eq. (9)
a i 1 1 5 0, a i 5 1 and b i 5 T m for the control
reduces to ordinary heat diffusion equation:
volumes which are undergoing the phase change.
≠T k Furthermore, on the basis of Eq. (18), it can be
]i 5 ]]2 sT i 21 2 2T i 1 T i 11d (12)
≠t r c Dx inferred that for an isothermal phase change, all
the heat supplied to the control volume undergo-
Backward differencing of the left side term gives, ing a phase change is used for changing the
after rearranging, the fully implicit finite differ- amount of latent heat content of that control
ence equation of the form: volume.
At this point it is worthwhile to describe the
a i 21 ? T i 21 1 a i ? T i 1 a i 11 ? T i 11 5 b i (13)
implementation of the computational model,
where coefficients a i 2 1 5 a i 1 1 5 2 Fo, a i 5 1 1 which is as follows:
2 3 Fo and b i 5 T iold are introduced for the sake (a) Coefficients ‘a’ of Eq. (13) are formed. For
of computational simplicity. Superscript ’old’ nodal points where the liquid fraction fli is strictly
refers to the previous time step and Fo is a finite in the interval [0,1], 0 , fli , 1, the coefficients of
difference form Fourier number: Eq. (13) are set to: a i 2 1 5 a i 1 1 5 0, a i 5 1 and
bi 5 Tm .
a ? Dt (b) The set of linear algebraic Eqs. (13) is
Fo 5 ]] (14)
Dx 2 solved using the Gauss-Seidel iterative procedure.
(c) Liquid fractions are updated from the tem-
where a 5 k /r c is the thermal diffusivity of the
perature field using Eq. (18).
PCM. The thermophysical properties in Eq. (14)
(d) A check for the ‘start’ and for the ‘end’ of
depend on the state of the control volume. Those
phase change is performed. Explicitly, if the state
of the solid phase should be inserted if the control
of the liquid fraction field changes within the
volume is in the solid state and those of the liquid
given time step, i.e. a finite volume commences or
phase if the control volume is in the liquid state.
terminates with the phase change, the coefficients
Now, consider the case when melting (or
of Eq. (13) need to be updated and steps (a)
freezing) occurs around a certain node ‘i’. In that
through (d) repeated for the same time step.
case, the liquid fraction fli lies strictly in the
In practice, for most time steps only one
interval [0,1]. Recognizing that for an isothermal
iteration is needed per time step. The only time
phase change:
when two iterations are needed is when the phase
Ti ; Tm (15) change boundary moves from one control volume
to the next one.
and from Eq. (5):
3.1. Checking for start /end of the phase change
≠h
]i ; 0 (16) At the end of each time step, the check for start
≠t
and / or end of the phase transition is performed
Eq. (9) becomes: throughout the entire domain. For the case of
melting, checking for the ‘start’ and ‘end’ of the
≠fl i k
L ] 5 ]]2 sT i 21 2 2T m 1 T i 11d (17) phase change is performed in the following
≠t r Dx fashion:

Backward differencing of the liquid fraction term 3.1.1. START of melting. For a given time step,
gives: if T i $ T m while T iold , T m , it indicates that within
56 B. Zivkovic and I. Fujii
this time step, the finite volume in question begins
with melting. In that case, the coefficients of Eq.
(13) are updated as described above and the
calculation for that step is performed again. It
should be noted, however, that in the time step
when a control volume has just begun with
melting, Eq. (18) has the form:
k Dt
fl i 5 f old
l i 1 ]] sT 2 2T m 1 T i 11d
r L Dx 2 i 21
c L
2 ] sT m 2 T old
i d (19)
L c
The last term on the right-hand side of Eq. (19)
represents the amount of sensible heat that is
needed to raise the temperature of the control
volume from the temperature in the previous time
step (T old
i ) to the melting temperature (T m ).
Consequently, that amount of heat can not be used
for melting the PCM.
Fig. 6. Flow chart.
3.1.2. END of melting. For a given time step, if
fli $ 1 while f liold , 1, it indicates that within this
time step, the control volume in question has
melted completely. In that case coefficients of Eq.
(13) are again set to a i2 1 5 a i 1 1 5 2 Fo, a i 5
old
1 1 2 3 Fo and b i 5 T i and the calculation for
that time step is performed again. In the time step
in which the phase change boundary moves from
the control volume in question to the next one,
coefficient b i has the following form:
b i 5 T m 2 ] s1 2 f old
li d (20)
where the last term on the right hand side can be
described as the amount of heat needed to com-
pletely melt the control volume in question within
the time step and which consequently can not be
used to raise the temperature of the PCM.
The flow chart for the computational procedure
is given in Fig. 6.
4. VERIFICATION OF THE MATHEMATICAL
MODEL
4.1. Test problem
The performance of the presented method is
first verified with a one-dimensional phase change
test problem explained in Voller (1990). A pure
liquid initially at 28C occupies the semi-infinite
space x $ 0. At time t 5 0 the surface at x 5 0 is
fixed at the temperature of 2108C, which is
below the freezing point of the substance T m 5
08C. As time proceeds, a solid layer builds up on
the surface x 5 0 and moves out into the liquid.
Simply stated, the problem is to determine how
the solid–liquid surface moves with time. The
thermal properties of the material in question are
assumed to be constant and equal for both solid
and liquid phase: k52 [W/ mK], r c52.5310 6
[J / m 3 K] and r L510 8 [J / m 3 ]. In numerical
analysis 50 time steps of Dt54.32310 4 [s] (1 / 2
days) and 20 space increments of Dx50.125 [m]
were used.
The position of the phase front after 25 days
(i.e. 50 time steps) obtained with proposed meth-
od is x50.8405 [m]. The difference between this
result and the result of x50.8415 [m] obtained by
Voller (1990) is merely 0.12%. Therefore, it could
be concluded that the accuracy of the proposed
computational model for conduction controlled
isothermal phase change is satisfactory.
4.2. Experimental verification
As was discussed in the previous paragraph, the
solution obtained with the proposed method gives
 An analysis of isothermal phase change of phase change material within rectangular and cylindrical containers
Table 1. Thermophysical properties of CaC1 2 ?6H 2 O
Melting point [8C]
Latent heat [KJ / kg]
Density [kg / m 3 ]: Solid
Liquid
Specific heat [kJ / kgK]: Solid
Liquid
Thermal conductivity [W/ mK]: Solid
Liquid
very satisfactory results for the conduction-con-
trolled one-dimensional phase change test prob-
lem. However, melting of the PCM in sealed
containers is generally multi-dimensional (both
radial and axial conduction exist) and also natural
convection occurs within the melted PCM. There-
fore, an experiment was performed in order to
investigate the influence of the assumptions of the
mathematical model. The PCM used for ex-
perimental analysis is calcium chloride hexahy-
drate (CaCl 2 ?6H 2 O) with the thermophysical
properties as listed in Table 1 (Fujii and Yano,
1996).
A rectangular container, made of stainless steel,
with dimensions of l5b5100 mm and d 520 mm
(Fig. 1), was filled with the calcium chloride
hexahydrate and well insulated on the lateral
Fig. 7. Test container.
Fig. 8. Variation with time of PCM’s temperature at the centre of the rectangular container (cf. Fig. 7.).
57
sides. A thermocouple was placed in the centre of
29.9 the container in the manner indicated in Fig. 7.
187
1710 The container with the solid PCM was then
1530 placed vertically in the constant temperature bath,
1.4 where the temperature was set to T ` 5608C.
2.2
1.09 The computational model was set up to re-
0.53 produce experimental conditions within the con-
stant temperature bath. The convection heat trans-
fer coefficient between the air and the container
wall was determined using the correlation given
in Incropera and DeWitt (1985), and was calcu-
lated to be aconv 516 [W/ m 2 K]. Furthermore, a
time step Dt55 s and space increment Dx52 mm
were used in the calculation. In Fig. 8 the
variation with time of numerical and experimental
values of the temperature at the centre of the test
container is shown.
From the results shown in Fig. 8, it can be
concluded that the agreement between numerical
and experimental data is well within experimental
uncertainties (i.e. positioning of the thermocou-
ple’s tip exactly in the centre of the container is
quite difficult and experimental data were read
from charts, which reduces accuracy). The higher
slope of the theoretical curve in the liquid region
58 B. Zivkovic and I. Fujii
is due to the fact that the Grashof number was
calculated for the temperature difference of T ` 2
T m ¯30 K, while in reality this difference be-
comes smaller as the temperature of the liquid
PCM increases. Consequently, the convective heat
transfer coefficient between the air and the
container wall used in the calculation is higher
than the ‘real’ one. Furthermore, it can be ob-
served from Fig. 8 that in theory PCM reaches its
melting temperature faster than in the experiment.
This is assumed to be due to the basic assumption
made in the mathematical model that the conduc-
tion resistance of the container wall is neglected.
Moreover, from the same figure it can be ob-
served that the calculated PCM’s melting time is
slightly longer than the experimental one, which
may be due to the fact that the natural convection
within the liquid PCM is ignored. However, it can
be seen that neglecting both the natural convec-
tion within the liquid PCM and the conduction
within the PCM in the direction of the HTF flow
do not introduce significant error in the prediction
of the PCM’s temperature variation during melt-
ing.
5. COMPARISON OF THE MELTING TIME
FOR RECTANGULAR AND CYLINDRICAL
CONTAINERS
The melting time of the incapsulated PCM is
one of the essential parameters for determining
the size and the shape of the container, as it must
correspond to the total amount of daily insolation.
To be specific, the container containing PCM
should be designed in such a way that at the end
of the day, complete melting of the PCM is
achieved. In that way, the maximum efficiency of
the LHES unit is achieved. Furthermore, complete
melting of the PCM is a necessary condition for
long-term (seasonal) thermal energy storage. In
light of that, the influence of the container’s
dimensions and its shape were numerically in-
Fig. 9. Geometry of the cylindrical container.
vestigated for the rectangular and cylindrical
containers.
The mathematical model for the isothermal
phase change of the PCM filling the cylindrical
container (Fig. 9) was derived under the same
assumptions as in the case of the rectangular
container. However, the governing equation for
the two models is different and for the case of the
cylindrical container it has the following form:
≠H 1 ≠ k ≠T
]5] ] ] ]
≠t r ≠r r ≠r S D (21)
In the above equation, H represents the total
enthalpy, which can be split into its sensible and
latent component (cf. Eq. (4)). The solution
methodology and numerical procedure for Eq.
(21) is the same as for Eq. (3).
5.1. Results and discussion
The dimensions of the containers were chosen
in such a manner that the volume as well as the
convective heat transfer area for both the cylindri-
cal and rectangular containers were equal. The
fixed dimensions were chosen to be the length of
the cylindrical container l c 50.2 m (cf. Fig. 9) and
the width of the rectangular container b50.1 m
(cf. Fig. 1). The air velocity was assumed to be
w55 m / s and its temperature T air 5608C. The
thermophysical properties of the air, as well as the
convective heat transfer coefficient between the
air and the container’s wall aconv , were taken
from Incropera and DeWitt (1985). The PCM
filling the containers was chosen to be calcium
chloride hexahydrate, with the thermophysical
properties as listed in Table 1.
Fig. 10 shows the variation with time of the
PCM’s temperature in the centres of both the
rectangular and cylindrical containers for the
different dimensions of the containers. For small
values of d (cf. Fig. 1) and ro (cf. Fig. 9), the
difference in melting time between the rectangular
 An analysis of isothermal phase change of phase change material within rectangular and cylindrical containers 59

Fig. 10. Comparison of the variation with time of the PCM’s temperature at the centre of the rectangular and cylindrical
containers.

and cylindrical containers is not so pronounced.
However, on increasing the mass of the PCM
filling the container, i.e. with increasing d for the
rectangular container and ro for the cylindrical
container, the difference in the melting time
increases considerably, with the rectangular
container showing a much shorter melting time
than the cylindrical container of the same volume
and heat transfer area.
A series of numerical experiments were per-
formed and their results are summarized in Fig.
11 which shows the influence of the amount of
PCM filling the container on the melting time of
PCM. It can be observed that for larger quantities
of the material filling the container, the difference
in the melting time between the rectangular and
cylindrical containers is very pronounced, with
the melting time of the cylindrical container being
nearly twice that of the rectangular one. It should
be pointed out that in order to make the com-
parison between the two geometries significant,
the numerical analysis was performed under the
condition of equal volume and heat transfer area
for both the rectangular and cylindrical containers.

Fig. 11. Comparison of the melting time for rectangular and cylindrical containers of equal volume and heat transfer area.
60 B. Zivkovic and I. Fujii
It is interesting to note that the correlation be-
tween the melting time and the mass of the PCM
is nearly linear.
6. CONCLUSION
A simple and easily implemented computation-
al model simulating transient behaviour of the
isothermal phase change is developed. A test
problem was solved and results obtained with the
proposed method show very close agreement with
the results obtained from other computational
models (cf. Voller, 1990). An experiment was
performed and numerical results verified with
experimental data.
Taking into consideration the basic assumptions
of the mathematical model and recognizing very
good agreement between the numerical and ex-
perimental results, the following conclusions can
be made:
1. Heat conduction resistance of the container’s
wall can be neglected without losing accuracy
in the computational data.
2. Conduction within the PCM in the direction of
the HTF flow can be ignored as its influence
was found to be negligible.
3. For flat thin containers, the effects of natural
convection within the liquid PCM can be
ignored without introducing a significant error
in the prediction of the temperature variation
with time within the PCM.
Moreover, comparison between the melting
time for the rectangular and cylindrical containers
was performed and the results show that the
rectangular container requires half of the melting
time as for the cylindrical container of the same
volume (i.e. equal mass of the PCM filling the
container) and the same heat transfer area between
HTF and the container’s wall. It is, therefore,
preferable to use rectangular containers for en-
capsulating the PCM.
NOMENCLATURE
A ht Heat transfer surface [m 2 ]
b Width of rectangular container [m]
c pf Specific heat of air [J / kgK]
c Specific heat [J / kgK]
fl Liquid fraction
Fo Fourier number
H Total enthalpy [J / kg]
h Sensible enthalpy [J / kg]
k Conductivity [W/ mK]
l Length of container [m]
L Latent heat of fusion [J / kg]
mf Mass flow rate of air [kg / s]
r Radius of cylindrical container [m]
T Temperature of PCM [8C]
T ` , T air Air temperature [8C]
Tm Melting point of PCM [8C]
t Time [h]
a Thermal diffusivity of PCM [m 2 / s]
aconv Heat transfer coefficient [W/ m 2 K]
d Thickness of rectangular container [m]
Dx Space increment [m]
Dt Time step [h]
r Density of PCM [kg / m 3 ]
REFERENCES
Duffie J. A. and Beckman W. A. (1991) Solar Engineering of
Thermal Processes, John Wiley, New York.
Abhat A. (1983) Low temperature latent heat thermal energy
storage: heat storage materials. Solar Energy 30(4), 313–
331.
Klein S. A., Beckman W. A. and Duffie J. A. (1976) A design
procedure for solar heating systems. Solar Energy 18, 113–
127.
Lacroix M. (1993) Numerical simulation of a shell-and-tube
latent heat thermal energy storage unit. Solar Energy 50(4),
357–367.
Bansal N. K. and Buddhi D. (1992) An analytical study of a
latent heat storage system in a cylinder. Energy Convers.
Mgmt 33(4), 235–242.
Esen M., Durmus A. and Durmus A. (1998) Geometric design
of solar-aided latent heat store depending on various param-
eters and phase change materials. Solar Energy 62(1),
12–28.
Soma D. and Dutta T. K. (1993) Mathematical modeling and
experimental studies on solar energy storage in a phase
change material. Solar Energy 51(5), 305–312.
Ismail K. A. R. and Alves C. L. F. (1986) Analysis of
shell-tube PCM storage systems. In Proceedings of the
Eight International Heat Transfer Conference, San Fran-
cisco, pp. 1781–1786.
Ghoneim A. A. (1989) Comparison of theoretical models of
phase-change and sensible heat storage for air and water-
based solar heating systems. Solar Energy 42(3), 209–220.
Morrison D. J. and Abdel-Khalik S. I. (1978) Effects of
phase-change energy storage on the performance of air-
based and liquid-based solar heating system. Solar Energy
20, 57–67.
Murray W. D. and Landis F. (1959) Numerical and machine
solutions of transient heat-conduction problems involving
melting or freezing. Transactions of ASME. Journal of
Heat Transfer 81, 106–112.
Voller V. and Cross M. (1981) Accurate solutions of moving
boundary problems using the enthalpy method. Int. J. Heat
Mass Transfer 24, 545–556.
Voller V. R. (1985) Implicit finite-difference solutions of the
enthalpy formulation of Stefan problems. IMA Journal of
Numerical Analysis 5, 201–214.
Voller V. R. (1990) Fast implicit finite-difference method for
the analysis of phase change problems. Numerical Heat
Transfer, Part B 17, 155–169.
Carslaw H. S. and Jaeger J. C. (1959) Conduction of Heat in
Solids, 2nd edn, Oxford University Press, Great Britain, pp.
282–287.
Zivkovic B. and Fujii I. (1999) Experimental results on
prevention of supercooling of low melting temperature salt
hydrates. In Proceedings of JSES /JWEA Joint Conference,
25–26 November, Kyoto, Japan, pp. 257–260 (in Japanese).
Voller V. R., Cross M. and Markatos N. C. (1987) An enthalpy
method for convection / diffusion phase change. Int. J.
Numerical Methods in Engineering 24, 271–284.
 An analysis of isothermal phase change of phase change material within rectangular and cylindrical containers 61

Belleci C. and Conti M. (1993) Transient behaviour analysis
of a latent heat thermal storage module. Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 36(15), 3851–3857.
Trp A., Frankovic B. and Lenic K. (1999) An analysis of
phase change heat transfer in a solar thermal energy store.
In Proceedings of ISES World Congress, July, Jerusalem,
Israel.
Fujii I. and Yano N. (1996) A consideration on phase change
behaviour of latent heat storage material. In Proceedings of
the Society of Heating, Air-conditioning and Sanitary
Engineers of Japan (in Japanese).
Incropera F. P. and DeWitt D. P. (1985) Introduction to heat
transfer, John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 288–308.