Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGiró Paloma, Jessica
dc.contributor.authorAlkan, Cemil
dc.contributor.authorChimenos Ribera, Josep Ma.
dc.contributor.authorFernández Renna, Ana Inés
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-21T10:08:44Z
dc.date.available2018-09-21T10:08:44Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.issn2076-3417
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/64740
dc.description.abstractMicroencapsulated Phase Change Materials (MPCM) are widely used in active and passive systems for thermal energy storage. To evaluate the strength of a proper shell/PCM system, comparisons were performed between laboratory-prepared MPCM samples produced by in situ polymerization with a phase change temperature of 50 C and a particle size of around 1–2 m with tetracosane as PCM, and polystyrene (PS) and poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) as shells. Evaluation of mechanical performance was performed for different samples by means of Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) at different temperatures (23 C and 60 C) and with different encapsulation ratios (1:3 and 1:1, shell:core) in order to compare their properties with the PCM below and above its phase change. Evaluations of the Effective Young’s modulus (E) and deformation properties were performed for both types of MPCM. For an encapsulation mass ratio of 1:3, PS has better mechanical properties because, when increasing the temperature, the E decreases less than with PMMA. In the comparison between PS/tetracosane systems with different encapsulation mass ratios (1:3 and 1:1), E values were higher for the 1:3 encapsulation mass ratio at both temperatures under study. This means that, in terms of mechanical and thermal properties, the best combination core/shell/encapsulation mass ratio is PS/tetracosane/1:3.ca_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipThe work was partially funded by the Spanish government (ENE2015-64117-C5-2R). The research leading to these results received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement No. PIRSES-GA-2013-610692 (INNOSTORAGE) and from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No. 657466 (INPATH-TES). The authors would like to thank the Catalan Government for the quality accreditation given to their research group DIOPMA (2014 SGR 1543).ca_ES
dc.language.isoengca_ES
dc.publisherMDPIca_ES
dc.relationMINECO/PN2013-2016/ENE2015-64117-C5-2-Rca_ES
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a https://doi.org/10.3390/app7070723ca_ES
dc.relation.ispartofApplied Sciences, 2017, vol. 7, núm 7, p. 723 (9 pp.)ca_ES
dc.rightscc-by (c) Jessica Giró et al., 2018ca_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectPhase change materialca_ES
dc.subjectMicroencapsulated phase change materialca_ES
dc.subjectAtomic force microscopyca_ES
dc.titleComparison of Microencapsulated Phase Change Materials Prepared at Laboratory Containing the Same Core and Different Shell Materialca_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleca_ES
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionca_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessca_ES
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.3390/app7070723
dc.relation.projectIDinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/610692ca_ES
dc.relation.projectIDinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/H2020/657466/EU/INPATH-TESca_ES


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

cc-by (c) Jessica Giró et al., 2018
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as cc-by (c) Jessica Giró et al., 2018