phase change material

1. See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267575511
Experimental Study of Cylindrical Latent Heat
Energy Storage Systems Using Lauric Acid as the
Phase Change Material
CONFERENCE PAPER · JULY 2012
DOI: 10.1115/HT2012-58279
CITATIONS
3
READS
54
3 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
Robynne Murray
Dalhousie University
17 PUBLICATIONS 63 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Dominic Groulx
Dalhousie University
88 PUBLICATIONS 242 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Available from: Dominic Groulx
Retrieved on: 17 March 2016

2. 1 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF CYLINDRICAL LATENT HEAT ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS
USING LAURIC ACID AS THE PHASE CHANGE MATERIAL
Chang Liu
Mechanical Engineering, Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Robynne E. Murray
Mechanical Engineering, Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Dominic Groulx
Mechanical Engineering, Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
ABSTRACT
Phase change materials (PCMs) inside latent heat energy
storage systems (LHESS) can be used to store large amounts of
thermal energy in relatively small volumes. However, such
systems are complicated to design from a heat transfer point of
view since the low thermal conductivity of PCMs makes
charging and discharging those systems challenging on a usable
time scale.
Results of experiments performed on both a vertical and a
horizontal cylindrical LHESS, during charging, discharging and
simultaneous charging/discharging, are presented in this paper.
Both LHESS are made of acrylic plastic, the horizontal LHESS
has one 1/2" copper pipe passing through its center. The
vertical LHESS has two 1/2" copper pipes, one through which
hot water flows, and the other through which cold water flows.
Each of the pipes has four longitudinal fins to enhance the
overall rate of heat transfer to and from the PCM, therefore
reducing the time required for charging and discharging.
The objective of this work is to determine the phase change
behavior of the PCM during the operation of the LHESS, as
well as the heat transfer processes within the LHESS. Natural
convection was found to play a crucial role during charging
(melting) and during simultaneous charging/discharging (in the
vertical LHESS). However, during discharging, the effect of
natural convection was reduced in both systems.
INTRODUCTION
Thermal energy storage (TES) has attracted more and
more attention in recent years due to the rising cost of fossil
fuels and increasing importance of environmental protection.
TES can convert available energy and improve its utilization,
which provides a promising solution for smoothing the
discrepancy between energy supply and demand. Current TES
systems can be categorized by the method they use to store
energy, such as sensible heat storage, latent heat storage and
thermochemical heat storage [1]. Among these energy storage
methods, latent heat energy storage systems (LHESS) show
more potential due to their high energy storage density and
nearly constant temperature during phase change [2].
LHESS uses phase change materials (PCMs) as energy
storage mediums: energy is stored during melting and released
during solidification. Various applications found in the open
literature include space heating [3], space cooling [4], hot water
systems, [5] and incorporating PCMs into building elements
[6].
Although a promising medium for energy storage, PCM
suffers from low thermal conductivity which limits its wide
application in industry. Various heat transfer enhancement
methods have been explored by researchers such as adding fins
to PCM container [7], inserting metal matrix into PCM [8],
PCM encapsulation [9], and combining the PCM with another
material which has a higher thermal conductivity [10].
Fins are the most commonly used heat transfer
enhancement method, and various studies have compared fin
sizes and orientations. It was observed that the shape of fins
Proceedings of the ASME 2012 Summer Heat Transfer Conference
HT2012
July 8-12, 2012, Rio Grande, Puerto Rico
HT2012-58279

3. 2 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
have an effect on heat transfer enhancement. In a concentric
tube heat exchanger with Erythritol as PCM, longitudinal fins
were recommended over circular fins [11]. Moreover, fins with
lessing rings and with bubble agitation were tested to study their
heat transfer enhancement, and results showed that both could
improve thermal performance [12]. Fin parameters were
studied both numerically and experimentally. It was reported
by Ismail et al. that fin thickness had a relatively small influence
on the solidification time; while fin length and the number of
fins strongly affected the complete solidification time [13].
Studying phase change numerically is complicated due to
the transient characteristics of the process. It was observed that
ignoring natural convection in mathematical modeling results in
the PCM taking longer to reach its maximum temperature [14].
For that reason, natural convection has to be accounted for and
simulated in order to properly describe the physics encountered
during phase change, especially during melting [15].
This paper presents experimental results obtained on two
cylindrical LHESS (filled with lauric acid as the PCM) during
charging, discharging and simultaneous charging/discharging
(vertical cylinder only). The objective of this work is to
determine the phase change behavior of the PCM during the
operation of the LHESS, as well as the heat transfer processes
of importance within the LHESS. The importance of natural
convection in the PCM melt will be highlighted. The transient
energetic behavior of those systems under the various modes of
operation (charging, discharging) is also investigated. Both
LHESS use fins to enhance the overall heat transfer rates during
the processes.
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Phase Change Material (PCM)
Lauric acid is the PCM being used in this study, as it is a
promising choice with nearly no supercooling and desirable
melting and freezing qualities [16]. The differential scanning
calorimeter (DSC) curve for lauric acid (dodecanoic acid;
CH3(CH2)10COOH; crude [< 80% pure, from Fisher Scientific])
shows a melting temperature range of 43.3 to 45.7°C and
solidification temperature range of 38.8 to 35 °C [16]. The
material properties are displayed in Table 1.
Apparatus
Two types of LHESS were studied: a horizontal cylinder
and a vertical cylinder. Both PCM containers are made of
acrylic plastic to enable visualization. PCM containers are
insulated with fiberglass wool and all hot water pipes are
insulated with self-sealing foam pipe wrap to minimize heat
losses to the surroundings.
Table 1. Thermal and Physical Properties of Lauric Acid ([17, 18])
Molecular Weight 200.31 (kg/kmol)
Density of Powder at 20°C 869 (kg/m3
)
Density of Liquid at 45°C 873 (kg/m3
)
Fusion Temperature 42.5 (°C)
Latent Heat of Fusion 182 (kJ/kg)
Heat Capacities Solid/Liquid 2.4/2.0 (kJ/kg·K)
Thermal Conductivities Solid
Thermal Conductivities Liquid
0.150 (W/m·K)
0.148(W/m·K)
Viscosity 0.008 (Pa·s)
Horizontal LHESS Experimental Setup
The horizontal cylinder is 12" long and 6" outside
diameter, 1/4" thick, with a 1/2" copper pipe passing through its
center through which water passes; 4 longitudinal copper fins,
also made of copper, are added to the pipe. Figure 1 shows the
horizontal LHESS containers. A schematic presenting the
experimental setup used for the charging and discharging
studies on the horizontal cylinder LHESS is shown in Fig. 2.
In this setup, seven type-T probe thermocouples are
connected to a National Instruments 16-channel thermocouple
module (NI9213) CompactDAQ data acquisition system.
Temperatures are recorded using LabView. As seen in Fig. 3,
the probe thermocouples are located inside the lauric acid (T10
to T14) as well as on the inlet and outlet.
Figure 1. a) 3D Solidworks rendering of the horizontal cylinder
LHESS, b) Picture of the horizontal cylinder LHESS before
charging containing the solid PCM.
a)
b)

4. 3 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Figure 2. Schematic of the experimental setup (horizontal system).
One probe was positioned inside each of the four PCM
compartments delimited by the fins in order to determine the
PCM melting behavior in each. Plus, based on the symmetry of
the studied system, twice the amount of information can be
obtained this way. In Fig. 3, probe T11, T13 and T14 are 1/2"
from the central pipe, while probe T12 is 1" from the pipe; T10
is in the middle of the gap between the end of the fin and the
cylinder wall (gap is 8 mm wide). Nine type-T surface
thermocouples are attached on the four fins to provide
additional temperature information. A pulse counting flowmeter
from Omega (model FTB 905) is connected to a counter/pulse
generation module (NI9435) on the DAQ system and also read
by LabView. In the charging loop, a 500W emersion heater in a
water bath (model TSP02793) is used to keep the hot water at a
constant temperature and water is circulated by a centrifugal
pump from Grundfos (model UPS 15-58 FS).
Figure 3. Positions of probe thermocouples in the horizontal
LHESS.
Figure 4. 3D Solidworks rendering and 2D cross-sectional views of
the horizontal cylinder LHESS.
Vertical LHESS Experimental Setup
A similar setup is used for the vertical cylindrical LHESS;
however, the PCM container orientation (Fig. 4) and locations
of thermocouples are different. The vertical cylinder is 24"
long, 1/4" thick, and has an 8" outside diameter, with two 1/2"
copper pipes passing through it, enabling simultaneous charging
and discharging. Each pipe has four longitudinal copper fins. In
this setup the cold water is circulated by the municipal water
pressure, and the hot water is circulated by a magnetic drive
centrifugal pump (Cole Parmer model EW-72012-10) from a
constant temperature hot water bath. A 2 kW emersion heater
(model TSP02794) is used to keep the hot water at a constant
temperature. Two OMEGA pulse counting flow meters (model
FTB 905) were used to record the flow rate of the hot and cold
water. Figure 5 shows a schematic of the experimental setup.
Type-T thermocouples are connected to a National
Instruments 16-channel thermocouple CompactDAQ module
(NI9213). Four of the thermocouples are located at the inlets
and outlets of the copper pipes, and probe thermocouples are
located at three heights, at three different sections around the
container, as seen in Fig. 6.
Figure 5. Schematic of the experimental setup (vertical system).

5. 4 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Figure 6. Position of probe thermocouples in the vertical LHESS.
Thermocouple probe positions were selected to obtain
information required to investigate the effect natural convection
in the liquid melt has on the overall phase change heat transfer.
The position of the probes relative to the center of the container
can be varied to increase the number of temperature
measurements, as seen in the two top views in Fig. 6.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
Horizontal LHESS Experimental Procedure
For the horizontal cylinder, two modes are studied:
charging and discharging. At the beginning of the charging
process, lauric acid is solid in the container at room
temperature. Hot water from the constant temperature water
bath is pumped through the finned copper pipe, eventually
entirely melting the lauric acid. The charging portion of the
experiment is completed when the system reaches steady state.
Temperatures are recorded every minute. At this point in the
experiment, cold water from the municipal water supply is
passed through the system to solidify the lauric acid and recover
the stored thermal energy (discharging process). This second
leg of the experiment is concluded when the lauric acid is
entirely solid at room temperature. Table 2 presents the
experimental parameters used for those studies.
Table 2. Experimental Parameters for horizontal LHESS studies
Hot Flow Rate 1.5 and 5 L/min
Hot inlet temperature 60 o
C
Cold Flow Rate 18 L/min
Cold inlet temperature 6 o
C
Table 3. Vertical Consecutive Charging/discharging
Experimental Parameters
Hot Flow Rate 0.55 L/min
Hot inlet temperature 60 o
C
Cold Flow Rate 3.5 L/min
Cold inlet temperature 6 o
C
Table 4. Vertical Simultaneous Charging/discharging
Experimental Parameters
Hot Flow Rate 5 L/min
Hot inlet temperature 60 o
C
Cold Flow Rate 5 L/min
Cold inlet temperature 6 o
C
Vertical LHESS Experimental Procedure
A similar experimental procedure is used for the vertical
LHESS. Preliminary experiments are performed to determine
complete charging and discharging time, as well as the total
energy storage capacity and phase change behavior of the PCM.
The PCM container is fully charged and then fully discharged
using the parameters in Table 3.
The system is then charged and discharged simultaneously
to replicate a solar domestic hot water system with domestic
water demand during sunshine hours. In this experiment the
container is fully charged first, and then run simultaneously for
24 hours using the parameters in Table 4.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Horizontal LHESS: Charging
Figure 7 shows the measured temperatures by the five
probes inserted inside the PCM when the flow rate during
charging is 1.5 L/min. Some fluctuations can be seen in the
measured temperatures, which are due to fluctuations in the
inlet temperature caused by the on/off function of the
temperature controller of the immersion heater. Probe T10,
being situated very close to the end of a fin, is the first to reach
and surpass the melting temperature of lauric acid (42.5ºC).
Probes T12 and T14 are situated in the top half of the container,
above the horizontal fins and on either side of the vertical fin.
As such, one would expect natural convection to be present, and
play a large role during heat transfer and melting in that part of
the system. It was observed that the PCM melted faster and
reached higher temperatures in those two quadrants compared
to the bottom quadrants where probes T11 and T13 are located.
In the bottom quadrants, natural convection stems only from the
vertical fin, diminishing the impact of natural convection in the
liquid melt on the overall melting process. Similar observations
can be made in Fig. 8, although over a shorter time scale since
the flow rate was higher (5 L/min).

6. 5 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Figure 7. Measured temperature of probe thermocouples during
charging (flow rate of 1.5 L/min).
Figure 8. Measured temperature of probe thermocouples during
charging (flow rate of 5 L/min).
a)
b)
Figure 9. Picture of PCM container after a) 2 hours of charging,
and b) 5 hours of charging (flow rate of 5 L/min).
Figure 2a) shows the horizontal LHESS when all the PCM
inside is solid, before charging. Figure 9 shows pictures taken
after 2 hours (a) and 5 hours of charging (b) with a flow rate of
5 L/min. After two hours of charging the PCM around the edge
of the fin melted and more PCM inside the container next to the
pipe has melted. After five hours, even more PCM melted
around the fins; with more melting in the top quadrants because
of natural convection. Also, knowing that the water flows from
left to right in Fig. 9b), more molten PCM can be observed
close to the inlet at left compared to the outlet at right.
Horizontal LHESS: Discharging
Figure 10 shows the temperatures recorded by the probes
during discharging with a cold water flow rate of 18 L/min. In
this case, natural convection is nearly non-existent. Each
thermocouple recorded a drop in temperature, in the order of
their position from the inlet; except for T12, which is farther
from the central pipe than the other probes. This explains the
additional time required to cool down and solidify the PCM.
Vertical LHESS: Complete charging
Figure 11 presents the temperatures recorded by the nine
probes in the PCM inside the vertical LHESS during charging
with a flow rate of 0.55 L/min.

7. 6 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Figure 10. Measured temperature of probe thermocouples during
discharging (flow rate of 18 L/min).
From Figs. 11a) and b), for the probes on the hot side of the
container and the probes situated between the hot and cold
pipes, the PCM starts melting rapidly closer to the top of the
container. It takes a longer time for the PCM near the bottom to
melt, because most of the energy given off by the pipe and fins
is displaced upward by natural convection. The expected
temperature plateau leading to the melting temperature can be
observed on Fig. 11c); the PCM is again melting in layers, from
top to bottom, the process dominated by natural convection but
taking longer since the heat source is at the opposite side of the
container.
With the given flow rate, it took close to 48 hours to melt
the entire PCM, noting that the last layer of PCM at the bottom
of the tank and below the fins takes a considerable amount of
time to melt because natural convection from the melted PCM
layer above does not assist in the process.
The total amount of energy stored over time in the LHESS
with a charging flow rate of 0.55 L/min is presented in Fig. 12.
The rate of energy storage is nearly constant. During the
charging process, at any given time, some of the solid PCM is
being heated to the melting temperature (sensible heat), some of
the PCM is melting (latent heat), and some of the liquid PCM is
being heated beyond the melting temperature (sensible heat).
All these simultaneous contributions result in this nearly
constant rate of energy storage and result in a total of 5 MJ of
energy stored. As seen in Fig. 12, the error in the energy
calculations increases over time as the uncertainty on the
measured temperature between the water at the inlet and outlet
gets compounded over time. When this temperature difference
is small enough, the calibration uncertainty is the same order of
magnitude as the temperature difference. For this reason the
theoretical energy storage capacity is used as a benchmark to
increase confidence in the energy values calculated.
Figure 11. Measured temperature of probe thermocouples during
charging (flow rate of 0.55 L/min): a) Hot-side probes T2, T5 and
T8; b) Middle probes T1, T4 and T7; c) Cold-side probes T3, T6
and T9.
c)
a)
b)

8. 7 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Figure 12. Energy stored in the vertical LHESS as a function
of time (flow rate of 0.55 L/min).
Vertical LHESS: Complete discharging
Figure 13 presents the temperature recorded by the nine
probes in the PCM of the vertical LHESS during discharging
with a flow rate of 3.5 L/min. Complete discharging of the
system took 24 hours.
The PCM solidified rapidly close to the cold pipe, as
expected. It took longer in the middle section of the container,
and ever longer in the hot section, on the other side of the
container. It is important to note that the temperature profiles
recorded at all three sections of the container are weakly
dependent on the probe height, showing that natural convection
did not play an important role in the solidification process.
Figure 13. Measured temperature of probe thermocouples during
discharging (flow rate of 3.5 L/min): a) Hot-side probes T2, T5 and
T8; b) Middle probes T1, T4 and T7; c) Cold-side probes T3, T6
and T9.
The liquid PCM cooled faster than the post-solidification
solid PCM. This is due to the large initial temperature
difference between the liquid PCM and the cold water in the
pipe, leading to an increased heat transfer rate. Also, as
solidification progresses around the pipe and fins, the extra
layer of solidified PCM acts as an ever increasing thermal
barrier, impeding heat transfer.
a)
b)
c)

9. 8 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Figure 14. Measured temperature of probe thermocouples during
simultaneous charging/discharging (flow rates of 5 L/min): a) Hot-
side probes T2, T5 and T8; b) Middle probes T1, T4 and T7;
c) Cold-side probes T3, T6 and T9.
Vertical LHESS: Simultaneous charging/discharging
Figure 14 shows the temperatures recorded during
simultaneous charging/discharging with hot and cold flow rates
of 5 L/min. The PCM in the container was initially fully
melted. In the ensuing 24 hours, during simultaneous charging
and discharging, only the bottom 2/3 of the PCM on the cold
side of the container solidified (see Fig. 16).
At the beginning of simultaneous charging and discharging,
Figs. 14a) and b) show an initial decrease in temperature in the
liquid PCM at every height. This seems to be due to an initial
thermal shock in the system when warmer water resting in the
cold pipe is quickly replaced by cold water. The liquid PCM in
the LHESS reacts by first dropping 2 to 4ºC, with larger
temperature drops at the bottom of the tank. With natural
convection keeping hotter liquid at the top, stratified liquid
PCM layers are observed in the container.
From Fig. 14c), energy is removed much faster from the
cold side of the system, with the temperature of the now solid
PCM dropping below 20ºC at the bottom and middle probes.
The temperature near the top, even on the cold side, remains
above the melting temperature as hot liquid PCM is displaced
from the lower part of the container to the top.
Figure 15 presents all nine temperature measurements
shown in Fig.14 on the same plot. This makes it easier to
visualize the overall temperature variations within the PCM
container. Shown in blue are the three temperatures measured
next to the cold water pipe, it can be seen that a large amount of
energy is extracted from this side of the system compared to the
middle portion (in green) and the hot side (in red).
Figure 15. Measured temperature of probe thermocouples during
simultaneous charging/discharging (flow rates of 5 L/min): red is
associated with hot-side probes, green with the middle probes and
blue with cold-side probes.
a)
b)
c)

10. 9 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Figure 16. Picture of vertical PCM container after 24 hours of
simultaneous charging and discharging.
The photograph in Fig. 16 shows the solid PCM on the
cold side of the LHESS (right side of the photograph), while
most of the PCM on the left side is still liquid. Part of one of the
fins on the cold pipe can be seen near to top. Also, the
insulation used in the experiment can be seen in the photograph.
Notice the blue color of lauric acid. This coloring comes from
a reaction of the lauric acid with the copper pipe and fins [16].
This reaction is mild and the lauric acid becomes saturated by
the copper rapidly, putting a stop to the reaction.
CONCLUSIONS
Results of experiments performed on both vertical and
horizontal cylindrical LHESS during charging, discharging, and
simultaneous charging/discharging have been presented. Each
pipe passing through the cylindrical PCM containers had four
longitudinal fins to enhance the overall rate of heat transfer in
and out of the systems.
Natural convection was found to play a crucial role during
charging (melting) and during simultaneous
charging/discharging (in the vertical LHESS).
During charging in the horizontal LHESS, the PCM in the
two upper quadrants melted faster due to the presence of natural
convection enhanced by the lower and side fins enclosing each
of the two quadrants. The PCM in the lower quadrants,
benefiting only from natural convection stemming from the side
fin (the other fin being above the side fin and not contributing
to natural convection) remained solid much longer.
In the vertical system, the upper region melted more rapidly
because of the increased energy carried to it by convective
movement of the liquid melt.
During discharging, the effect of natural convection was
reduced in both systems. Finally, during simultaneous
charging/discharging, a stratified state was found inside the
remaining liquid PCM.
Future work will include performing additional
experiments at different flow rates, as well as repeating these
same experiments with different thermocouple probe positions.
This will lead to more information about the temperature
profiles inside the LHESS, resulting in a better understanding of
the impact of natural convection. Phase change heat transfer
numerical models will also be created to increase the
understanding of heat transfer in LHESS and help in future
LHESS design. Those numerical models will be validated
using the experimental results.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to the Canadian Foundation for
Innovation (CFI), ecoNovaScotia and Scotian WindField inc.
for their financial assistant in procuring some of the
infrastructures, as well as the Natural Science and Engineering
Research Council of Canada (NSERC), the Dalhousie Research
in Energy, Advanced Materials and Sustainability (DREAMS)
program (an NSERC CREATE program) and Dalhousie
University for their financial Support.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Abhat, Low temperature latent heat thermal energy
storage: heat storage materials, Solar Energy, 30, 313-
332 (1983)
[2] F. Agyenim, N. Hewitt, P. Eames and M. Smyth, A
review of materials, heat transfer and phase change
problem formulation for latent thermal energy storage
systems (LHTESS), Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 14, 615-628 (2010)
[3] E. Halawa, W. Saman, Thermal performance analysis
of a phase change thermal storage unit for space
heating, Renewable Energy, 36, 259-264 (2011)
[4] V. Badescu, Model of a thermal energy storage device
integrated into a solar assisted heat pump system for
space heating, Energy Conversion and Management,
44, 1589-1604 (2003)
[5] U. Stritih, Heat transfer enhancement in latent heat
thermal storage system for buildings, Energy and
Buildings, 35, 1097-1104 (2003)
[6] D.A. Neeper, Thermal dynamics of wallboard with
latent heat storage, Solar Energy, 68, 393-403 (2000)
[7] F. Agyenim, N. Hewitt, P. Eames, M. Smyth, A review
of materials, heat transfer and phase change problem

11. 10 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
formulation for latent thermal energy storage systems
(LHTESS), Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 14, 615-628 (2010)
[8] Y. Hamada, W. Ohtsu, F. Jun, Thermal response in the
thermal energy storage material around heat transfer
tubes: effect of additives on the heat transfer rates,
Solar Energy, 75, 317-328 (2003)
[9] M.N.A. Hawlader, M.S. Uddin, M.M. Khin,
Microencapsulated PCM thermal energy storage
system, Applied Energy, 74, 195-202 (2003)
[10] R.V. Seeniraj, N.L. Narasimhan, Performance
enhancement of a solar dynamics LHTS module
having both fins and multiple PCMs, Solar Energy, 82,
535-542 (2008)
[11] F. Agyenim, P. Eames, M. Smyth, A comparison of
heat transfer enhancement in a medium temperature
thermal energy storage heat exchanger using fins,
Solar Energy, 83, 1509-1520 (2009)
[12] R. Velraj, R.V. Seeniraj, B. Hafner, C. Faber,
K.R.Schwarzer, Heat transfer enhancement in a latent
heat storage system, Solar Energy, 65, 171-180 (1999)
[13] K.A.R. Ismail, R.I.R. Moranes, A numerical and
experimental investigation of different containers and
PCM options for cold storage modular units for
domestic applications, International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer, 52, 4195-4202 (2009)
[14] P. Lamberg, R. Lehtiniemi, A.M. Henell, Numerical
and experimental investigation of melting and freezing
processes in phase change material storage,
International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 43, 277-
287 (2004)
[15] R. Murray, L. Desgrosseilliers, J. Stewart, N.
Osbourne, G. Marin, A. Safatli, D. Groulx, M.A.
White, Design of a Latent Heat Energy Storage System
Coupled with a Domestic Hot Water Solar Thermal
System, Proceedings of the World Renewable Energy
Congress - WREC 2011, Linköping, Sweden (2011)
[16] L. Desgrosseilliers, R. Murray, A. Safatli, G. Marin, J.
Stewart, N. Osbourne, M.A. White, D. Groulx, Phase
Change Material Selection in the Design of a Latent
Heat Energy Storage System Coupled with a Domestic
Hot Water Solar Thermal System, 2011 ASHRAE
Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada (2011)
[17] Chemical Properties Handbook, edited by C. L. Yaws,
McGraw-Hill (1999)
[18] A11672 – Dodecanoic Acid, Material Safety Data
Sheet, Alfa Aesar, (2009)