Comprehensive Comparison of Different Models for Large-Scale Thermal Energy Storage

F. Ochs, A. Dahash, A. Tosatto, Michael Reisenbichler, K. O’Donovan, G. Gauthier, Christian Kok Skov, T. Schmidt
{"title":"Comprehensive Comparison of Different Models for Large-Scale Thermal Energy Storage","authors":"F. Ochs, A. Dahash, A. Tosatto, Michael Reisenbichler, K. O’Donovan, G. Gauthier, Christian Kok Skov, T. Schmidt","doi":"10.2991/ahe.k.220301.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Large-scale thermal energy storages (TES) are advantageous to bridge the seasonal gap between heat demand and availability of renewables. However, the high investment costs associated with large-scale TES is still seen as a major barrier. Among others, challenges are space availability and the presence of groundwater. The complexity of the processes and interactions motivate the application of simulation tools for planning such systems. For TES optimization, flexible and detailed models are required that allow to investigate different geometries, insulation levels and boundary conditions, e.g. presence of groundwater (GW). In contrast, fast and easy-to-use models are required for simulations of a TES integrated in a larger system. In this work, different TES models are compared in various simulation platforms: COMSOL Multiphysics, TRNSYS, Modelica/Dymola and MATLAB/Simulink. The paper summarizes the features of the different TES models, shows the different concepts to reduce the model complexity and compares the results with respect to thermal losses and temperature stratification. TES Types and geometries include buried tanks (cylinder, cuboid), pits (truncated cone, pyramid stump) and hybrids (cylinder with cone stump, cuboid with pyramid stump). TES can be built either completely buried or partially buried building a dam with (part of) the excavated soil. Detailed 2D and 3D FE models developed in COMSOL Multiphysics were validated against measured data from a pit TES and were used as reference for this study. Some of the models take advantage of symmetry and cylindrical coordinates in order to reduce the model to 2D (cylinder, cone). Within this work, deficiencies could be identified, models could be improved and also the influence of the user was seen. Overall, good to acceptable agreement between the tools was achieved after a review phase and after eliminating bugs and user influence.","PeriodicalId":177278,"journal":{"name":"Atlantis Highlights in Engineering","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Atlantis Highlights in Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2991/ahe.k.220301.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Large-scale thermal energy storages (TES) are advantageous to bridge the seasonal gap between heat demand and availability of renewables. However, the high investment costs associated with large-scale TES is still seen as a major barrier. Among others, challenges are space availability and the presence of groundwater. The complexity of the processes and interactions motivate the application of simulation tools for planning such systems. For TES optimization, flexible and detailed models are required that allow to investigate different geometries, insulation levels and boundary conditions, e.g. presence of groundwater (GW). In contrast, fast and easy-to-use models are required for simulations of a TES integrated in a larger system. In this work, different TES models are compared in various simulation platforms: COMSOL Multiphysics, TRNSYS, Modelica/Dymola and MATLAB/Simulink. The paper summarizes the features of the different TES models, shows the different concepts to reduce the model complexity and compares the results with respect to thermal losses and temperature stratification. TES Types and geometries include buried tanks (cylinder, cuboid), pits (truncated cone, pyramid stump) and hybrids (cylinder with cone stump, cuboid with pyramid stump). TES can be built either completely buried or partially buried building a dam with (part of) the excavated soil. Detailed 2D and 3D FE models developed in COMSOL Multiphysics were validated against measured data from a pit TES and were used as reference for this study. Some of the models take advantage of symmetry and cylindrical coordinates in order to reduce the model to 2D (cylinder, cone). Within this work, deficiencies could be identified, models could be improved and also the influence of the user was seen. Overall, good to acceptable agreement between the tools was achieved after a review phase and after eliminating bugs and user influence.
大型蓄热模型的综合比较
大型热能储存(TES)有利于弥合热需求和可再生能源可用性之间的季节性差距。然而,与大规模TES相关的高投资成本仍被视为主要障碍。其中面临的挑战包括空间可用性和地下水的存在。过程和相互作用的复杂性促使应用仿真工具来规划这样的系统。对于TES优化,需要灵活和详细的模型,以允许研究不同的几何形状,绝缘水平和边界条件,例如地下水的存在(GW)。相比之下,需要快速和易于使用的模型来模拟集成在更大系统中的TES。在这项工作中,不同的TES模型在不同的仿真平台上进行了比较:COMSOL Multiphysics, TRNSYS, Modelica/Dymola和MATLAB/Simulink。本文总结了不同TES模型的特点,介绍了降低模型复杂性的不同概念,并对热损失和温度分层的结果进行了比较。TES的类型和几何形状包括埋罐(圆柱体、长方体)、坑(截锥形、金字塔桩)和混合型(圆柱体、锥形桩、长方体、金字塔桩)。污水处理系统可采用全埋或部分埋的方式,用(部分)开挖的土壤筑坝。在COMSOL Multiphysics中建立的详细的2D和3D有限元模型与来自矿井TES的测量数据进行了验证,并作为本研究的参考。一些模型利用对称和柱面坐标将模型简化为二维(柱面、锥面)。在这项工作中,可以发现缺陷,改进模型,还可以看到用户的影响。总的来说,在审查阶段和消除bug和用户影响之后,工具之间达成了良好的可接受的协议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信