Have a look to this:

http://www.e-4epcm.com/preassemblati

It's only in Italian (sorry) but I guess you can use Google to translate.

Dear Salvatore Vasta, Many thanks for your suggestions.

Its better to use panels along with insultion b/w pcm and concrete

Depends on the application, properties and the costs of the process. Each types has it owns characteristics.

It would be better to use panels or macro-encapsulations to justify the cost. However solid-solid transition PCMs can be directly mixed with the concrete.

It would be better to go for PCM panel for following reasons

1.) Panels can be easily retrofitted in existing buildings which is not the case for mixing the PCM with Concrete.

2.) Performance assurance can be justified by frequent maintenance of PCM panel.

3.) Cost benefits

4.) Liquid PCM leakage issues can be easily tackled with PCM panels.

With the above reasons PCM panels are the best suitable choice for building application.

Dear, Xiaobin Gu

The answer to your question can be very varied, it depends on the characteristics of the building, the location of the building, the purpose of the building and many other factors. Here is a list of very resentful scientific publications that deal with this issue from different points of view. Consider that these scientific contributions will be useful. I would like to add that I agree with the opinions of the researchers, Salvatore Vasta and Hayder Ibrahim Mohammed

• · Experimental evaluation of fire resistance performance of cement mortar with PCM/Mg(OH)2-based composite fine aggregate
• · Experimental investigation of thermal performance for pulsating flow in a microchannel heat sink filled with PCM (paraffin/CNT composite)
• · Performance enhancement of a thermoelectric harvester with a PCM/Metal foam composite
• · A passive thermal management system of Li-ion batteries using PCM composites: Experimental and numerical investigations
• · Preparation and characterization of composite hydrate salt PCM of industrial grade disodium hydrogen phosphate with sodium carbonate
• · Silica fume/capric acid-stearic acid PCM included-cementitious composite for thermal controlling of buildings: Thermal energy storage and mechanical properties
• · Pore-scale heat transfer of heat sink filled with stacked 2D metal fiber-PCM composite
• · Experimental study of the passive and active performance of real-scale composite PCM room in winter
• · Simulation on heat transfer and thermal storage processes of foamed metal composite PCM microstructure
• · Fly Ash/Octadecane Shape-Stabilized Composite PCMs Doped with Carbon-Based Nanoadditives for Thermal Regulation Applications
• · Investigation and properties of a novel composite bio-PCM to reduce summer energy consumptions in buildings of hot and dry climates
• · Mechanical and thermo-physical performances of gypsum-based pcm composite materials reinforced with carbon fiber
• · A novel composite PCM for seasonal thermal energy storage of solar water heating system
• · Thermal energy storage and thermal conductivity properties of Octadecanol-MWCNT composite PCMs as promising organic heat storage materials
• · Assessment of PCM/SiC-based composite aggregate in concrete: Mechanical, physical and microstructural properties
• · Thermal properties of composite organic phase change materials (PCMs): A critical review on their engineering chemistry
• · Preparation and phase change performance of graphene oxide and silica composite Na2So4·10H2O phase change materials (PCMs) as thermal energy storage materials
• · Design optimization of a composite solar wall integrating a PCM in a individual house: Heating demand and thermal comfort considerations
• · Preparation and thermophysical performance of diatomite-based composite PCM wallboard for thermal energy storage in buildings

I consider the contributions of teachers Salvatore Vasta and Debrayan Bravo Hidalgo to be very relevant

Dear Debrayan Bravo Hidalgo good sharing, thanks!

Dear Muhammad Mahabat Khan your system-level advice is useful.

Dear Hayder Ibrahim Mohammed can you please further clarify their characteristic (i.e., pros and cons).

Dear Dnyandip Bhamare thanks for your sharing, is there any limitation of the PCM panel?

Dear Vikas Chauhan, the cost of solid-solid PCM may be relatively higher than the common solid-liquid PCM. Also, their latent heat may be much lower.

Dear Xiaobin Gu

The major disadvantage associated with PCM panel is the weight penalty it imposes on existing structure. However, with suitable light weight panel, selecting suitable PCM based on its thermophysical properties, this issue can be minimize. For selection of suitable PCM in building application you can refer my recently proposed MKR index which can be found in the article below.

"Proposal of a unique index for selection of optimum phase change material for effective thermal performance of a building envelope"

Article Proposal of a unique index for selection of optimum phase ch...

Generally you can include PCM in the envelope using different techniques. You can either directly mix different types of PCMs with mortar or concrete ( for example use PCM microcapaules or SSPCM powder) or you can use a form-stable composite PCM as a separate component. For example, you can use a macro-encapsulated PCM in a sandwich panel layer.

The efficiency of PCMs generally depends on several factors. You need to consider the change in mechanical properties along with thermal properties to decide what is the best approach for your application.

You can check this paper below to get more ideas:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950061819312231

Such selection depends on several requirements: physical, chemical and thermal.

In here you find a working procedure to support the selection of the most suitable PCM/TES:

A work procedure of utilising PCMs as thermal storage systems based on air-TES systems. Energy Conversion and Management 77:608.

As mentioned in Afshin Marani's comment, PCM can be included in the envelope using several techniques. Different types of PCMs can be directly mixed into the concrete (PCM microcapsules or SSPCM powder) or a form-stable composite PCM can be used as a separate component.

Afshin Marani himself, in the quoted paper, described porous inclusion in lightweight aggregates as a further alternative. This allows the inclusion of much higher amounts of PCM than the microencapsulation without altering the mechanical properties of the concrete (made with lightweight aggregates).

The method described by the patent below allows up to 180 kg of PCM to be included in one cubic meter of lightweight concrete, essentially giving a thermal inertia equal to that of ordinary concrete with a mass almost halved, but with a lower thermal conductivity.

Patent Production of Thermal Energy Storage Systems

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2019012074

Chinese version: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=CN292983480&_cid=P22-KR29P8-78566-1

Further experiments to characterize cladding panels manufactured using this composite material are now underway.

Hi,

Hope you find the answer in this review paper

Review on using microencapsulated phase change materials (PCM) in building applications

Xiaobin Gu Microencapsulated PCM improves the heat transfer rate between PCM and its surrounding but it decreases the compressive strength as well of the whole system so you have to achieve good mechanical properties along the thermal properties. You can use some of chemical synthesis process for improving the mechanical properties.

Reference - Article Review on Using Microencapsulated Phase Change Materials (PC...

This is an important question, and to answer requires to look at several aspects.

Encapsulation:

Combining PCM with building materials, like concrete or gypsum, allows handling of the materials to be unchanged. However it requires a small scale encapsulation because of the material nature. Typically this is by microencapsulation, which from the chemical process limits PCM to organic PCM. When PCM is encapsulated macroscopically, like in panels, the choice of PCM is bigger, specifically including salthydrates.

Consequences from the choice of PCM, being related to the type of encapsulation:

Salthydrates are typically cheaper, have no or very low fire hazard, and often higher storage capacity than organic PCM; the choice of melting points or melting point ranges is however better with organic materials. But these are just general trends.

Thermal performance and positioning of PCM:

Incorporating PCM in building materials means the PCM is equally distributed throughout, for example a wall. However, the PCM effective to buffer surface temperatures on daily cycles is only the PCM close to the surface. Therefore, using PCM in building materials in thick walls is not efficient.

PCM in gypsum plaster bords mounted at the surface e.g. of a wall are an exception, actually already being similar to mounting a PCM panel.

The advantage of panels is the possibility to concentrate the PCM at the location where it is most efficient. This is typically on the inside if temperature swings of indoor temperatures are allowed, and if the temperature is highly regulated it is typically closer to the outside to buffer heat flux for example from the sun into a building. The option to place PCM panels at a selected location also offsets somehow the limited choice of melting point or melting point range of sylt hydtrates, because the location can be optimized with respect to the melting performance of available PCM.

The size of encapsulation also limits the amount of PCM leaking in case of damage. This is an important issue in buildings, and I have put it separately because it is not an issue where a simple answer with regard to a general type of application can be made; the specific product, it's testing, as well as the use of a building and the behavior of the inhabitants can be significant.

Last, but not least, the long-term development of building construction should be taken into account.

Specifically concrete production is connected to release of large amounts of CO2, so I would expect that the use of concrete in the future will be less widespread. More general, recycling microencapsulated PCM after being incorporated in building materials is probably close to impossible, however if this is a limitation depends on how much building materials need to be recycled.

In general I think using macroencapsulated PCM, like in panels, has in a long run significant advantages.

But this should not be seen exclusively; I think there are markets for both.

All of them

No specific answer. All of them could be suitable keeping the following concerns:

- Application purpose (cooling or heating)

- Position/location of installed PCM within the building construction

- Type of construction materials used and their influence on the PCM (thermally and environmentally)

- Passive or active incorporation technique adopted

I will say microencapsulated PCM cos of the largely exposed surface area.

You can check my work on why microencapsulated could be useful. Plus the use biobased as possible replacement for paraffins

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352710223001602