G Model

ENB-3577; No. of Pages 7

ARTICLE IN PRESS
Energy and Buildings xxx (2012) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy and Buildings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enbuild

Review

Thermal characterization of gypsum boards with PCM included: Thermal energy storage in buildings through latent heat
Alicia Oliver
Department of Construction and Technology in Architecture, Polytechnic University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
This work studies the thermal behavior of a new construction material: gypsum board containing 45% by weight of phase change materials (PCMs) reinforced with additives. A facility has been designed and built to simulate the hygrothermal conditions of any room or building. The inuence of different parameters and variables regarding heat storage in buildings (air temperature, air velocity, material position, and so on) has been studied. The thermal storage capacity of different construction materials with similar use and position in buildings than boards with PCMs laminated gypsum boards, bricks, etc. has been evaluated and compared. It has been proved that a 1.5 cm-thick board of gypsum with PCMs stores 5 times the thermal energy of a laminated gypsum board, and the same energy as a 12 cm-thick brick wall within the comfort temperature range (2030 C). This work demonstrates the suitability of incorporating PCMs into gypsum boards to increase heat storage capacity and to reduce energy consumption. 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 6 November 2011 Received in revised form 16 January 2012 Accepted 20 January 2012 Keywords: Thermal energy storage PCM Gypsum Board Energy saving Thermal comfort

Contents 1. 2. 3. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Materials and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1. Incoming temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2. Air velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3. PCM percentage in the board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4. Board thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5. Comparison between different materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

4.

1. Background Thermal energy storage has been linked to architecture since old days. In recent years, thermal energy storage systems are arousing

Abbreviations: BW, brick wall (t = 12.0 cm); CP, cladding position; FP, free (oblique) position; LY, laminated gypsum board; PCM, phase change material; SB*, slim board (t = 1.5 cm) with PCMs; SP, sandwich panel (2 layers aluminum (1.5 mm) + 100 mm insulation material); TB*, thick board (t = 2.5 cm) with PCMs; Tin , incoming temperature; Tins , inside temperature; Tint , interior temperature; Tout , outgoing temperature; Tsurf , surface temperature. Tel.: +34 656374856. E-mail address: oliver alice@yahoo.es 0378-7788/$ see front matter 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.026

the interest of scientists actively pursuing the reduction of fuel use and seeking solutions to energy crisis. The systems make possible the correspondence between both energy supply and demand periods, and have great potential for improving energy efciency. Latent heat storage through PCMs is the most efcient way to store thermal energy in the construction eld. PCMs may be applied in several elds, such as medicine, botany and sports [1,2]. Different research projects have been developed in the building eld, from the early 1980s of the last century. Most of them are focused to combine PCMs with different construction materials, such as concrete, ceramic, glass, or to incorporate them into constructive elements, like sandwich panels so that thermal inertia is improved [39]. Other lines of research have studied their

Please cite this article in press as: A. Oliver, Thermal characterization of gypsum boards with PCM included: Thermal energy storage in buildings through latent heat, Energy Buildings (2012), doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.026

G Model
ENB-3577; No. of Pages 7 2

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Oliver / Energy and Buildings xxx (2012) xxxxxx

Fig. 1. Thermal inertia accumulated according to the position of the insulation material within the wall 2.

application to improve the effectiveness of specic devices in buildings, such as water and photovoltaic systems [1013]. The reasons for choosing gypsum in this work are availability, profusion in construction, and mainly its position in construction systems. Gypsum is usually found in partition walls and it is always located in the interior side of a wall as a cladding element. This guarantees the use of most of the thermal inertia; actually this gets increased when PCMs are added since the insulation material is outside, as showed in Fig. 1. Since the 1990s several experiences have studied the addition of PCMs to gypsum. Some of them were focused on physical characterization [1417], while others were centered on the numerical calculation of heat capacity [1821]. There is a product available in the market Smart Board, BASF [22] that includes 26% by weight of PCMs. A new construction element has been studied in this research: a gypsum board including 45% by weigh of PCMs, which is the highest rate ever incorporated. The work is particularly intended to study its thermal behavior, and to demonstrate its suitability to guarantee thermal inertia in any room.

Several parameters have been analyzed to compare the inuence of the boundary conditions on the energy exchange: A. B. C. D. E. Incoming temperature: 25 C, 30 C, 35 C, 40 C. Air velocity: 1.5 m/s and 2.0 m/s. Weight percentage of PCMs in the board: 37.5% and 44.5%. Board thickness: 1.5 cm and 2.5 cm. Board location: cladding and free (oblique) position. Several construction materials have been tested: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Gypsum boards with 44.5% PCMs (1.5 cm thick). Gypsum boards with 44.5% PCMs (2.5 cm thick). Gypsum boards (1.5 cm thick). Brick wall (12.0 cm thick). Thermal brick wall (14.0 cm thick). A sandwich panel made of aluminum sheets with insulation core (10.0 cm thick).

2. Materials and methods A new method has been proposed to evaluate the thermal behavior of different construction materials i.e. thermal storage capacity, thermal delay, and so on depending on boundary conditions, such as air velocity or indoor temperature. Micronal DS 5001X has been chosen among all PCMs available in the market. This microencapsulated parafn avoids leakage during the liquid phase and makes heat transfer easier by increasing the contact area. Its phase-change temperature is 26 C, close to comfort conditions, and its enthalpy is 110 J/g. Parafn has been mixed with gypsum and reinforcing additives, such as ber and plasticizer. Several combinations covering a wide range of doses of aggregates have been mixed to get different compound materials which have been tested both physically and mechanically. The product containing the highest rate of PCMs in compliance with the regulations regarding physical and mechanical properties of gypsum (UNE 13 279) [23] has been chosen. An experimental facility was previously designed and manufactured to simulate energy exchange between materials and indoor environment of a building. The facility consists of an insulated closed circuit where air is put in motion by a controlled fan. Air temperature can be risen up through a heater and controlled by a P.I.D., to reach the selected conditions. Heat exchange between the air ow and the test materials takes place in an adiabatic box. Two thermocouples measure the temperature at both the adiabatic box inlet and outlet. The energy accumulated in each time interval could be estimated, and hence the stored energy [23]. Data system and data logger software complete the facility.

Thermal tests were carried out using 1 m2 of each construction material. The thickness of each element was different: 1.5 cm and 2.5 cm for the gypsum boards, 10.0 cm for the sandwich panel, 12.0 cm for the brick wall, and 14.0 cm for the thermal-brick wall. Losses have been primarily quantied trying out the adiabatic box without materials. The same boundary conditions have been used for testing materials. The calibration of the equipment required the repetition of trials to eliminate measurement errors. As a whole, 170 tests have been carried out. The following parameters were tested: incoming temperature (Tin ), outgoing temperature (Tout ), inside temperature (Tins ), and surface temperature (Tsurf ). Temperature measurements were recorded every 2 min. As an example, the values obtained for these parameters in one thermal test are shown below. Fig. 2 shows test conditions: gypsum boards with 44.5% PCMs, 2.5 cm thick, free (oblique) position. The evolution of the difference between input and output temperature may be obtained from these values, and therefore the stored energy in time, as shown in Fig. 3.

3. Results and discussion The test results about the inuence of variables in thermal storage capacity have been summarized in the following tables and graphs. It was found that no energy is stored beyond 4 h testing and even before. The values represented in the following tables and graphs correspond to this period of time.

Please cite this article in press as: A. Oliver, Thermal characterization of gypsum boards with PCM included: Thermal energy storage in buildings through latent heat, Energy Buildings (2012), doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.026

G Model
ENB-3577; No. of Pages 7

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Oliver / Energy and Buildings xxx (2012) xxxxxx 3

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 0.0

Tin AND Tout VARIATION IN TIME GYPSUM BOARD WITH PCM, T= 2.5 cm FREE POSITION

T (C)

Tout

Tin
1.0

Tinside

Tsurf
2.0 3.0

Time (h)

Fig. 2. Variation in time of Tin , Tout , Tins , and Tsurf 4.

1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 Time(h) 4.0 E (kJ) STORED ENERGY GYPSUM BOARD WITH PCM T 2 5 cm. FREE POSITION ENERGY: PCM, T= 2.5

Fig. 3. Energy stored by 1 m2 of gypsum board with PCMs (Tin = 35 C), free (oblique) position 4.

3.1. Incoming temperature Table 1 shows energy stored by 1 m2 of gypsum board (37.5% PCMs. T = 1.5 cm. Vair = 2.0 m/s. Free (oblique) position. The selected range of temperature from 25 C to 40 C covers a wide palette of hygrothermal conditions within a building exposed to different boundary conditions, such as large heat gains, solar radiation, equipment, occupancy, lighting and so on. As the incoming temperature is higher the energy provided by the system increases. If necessary, the new boards can store over 600 kJ/m2 , that is to say, they can store almost three times more than in low thermal load spaces. 3.2. Air velocity Table 2 shows energy stored according to air velocity. Selected values for fan drive were 1.5 m/s and 2.0 m/s. According to measurements taken in the adiabatic box, the air velocities were 0.38 m/s and 0.58 m/s respectively which t in the comfort range (02.0 m/s), see [1].
Table 1 Gypsum board with 37.5% PCM. T = 1.5 cm. Vair = 2.0 m/s. Free position stored energy (kJ/m2 ). Tin ( C) Time (h) 2 25 30 35 40 183.42 413.27 403.26 496.05 4 236.49 501.47 575.95 612.03

Table 2 Gypsum board with PCM 37.5%, Tin = 35 C. Free position. Stored energy (kJ/m2 ). Vair (m/s) Time (h) 2 1.5 2.0 420.20 540.95 4 455.66 588.16

When the air velocity is 2.0 m/s, the stored energy is 25% more than at 1.5 m/s. If air velocity gets increased to the limit for comfort conditions, the thermal storage capacity of the system would be signicantly improved. 3.3. PCM percentage in the board Table 3 shows energy stored according to %PCM in the board and Tin . The incorporation of PCMs into a gypsum board entails a decrease of its physical and mechanical properties [23], which can even ultimately provoke the lack of suitability for its intended use
Table 3 Gypsum board with PCM, Vair = 2.0 m/s. Free position. Stored energy (kJ/m2 ). PCM % 37.5 44.5 30 35 30 35 Tin ( C) Time (h) 2 406.14 499.61 489.04 592.34 4 578.83 613.00 705.06 740.73

Please cite this article in press as: A. Oliver, Thermal characterization of gypsum boards with PCM included: Thermal energy storage in buildings through latent heat, Energy Buildings (2012), doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.026

G Model
ENB-3577; No. of Pages 7 4

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Oliver / Energy and Buildings xxx (2012) xxxxxx

Table 4 Gypsum board with 44.5% PCM. 10 kg. Vair = 2.0 m/s. Cladding position. Stored energy (kJ/kg). Thickness (cm) Tin ( C) Time (h) 2 1.5 2.5 30 35 30 35 39.00 47.11 34.19 40.89 4 56.23 61.22 46.80 59.04

Table 5 Gypsum board with 44.5% PCM. Vair = 2.0 m/s. Free position. Stored energy (kJ/kg). Thickness (cm) Tin ( C) Time (h) 2 1.5 2.5 30 35 30 35 52.48 56.68 52.09 57.30 4 65.03 70.88 71.64 78.81

means that in 1.5 cm-thick boards the thermal exchange affects the 66.66% of the material, and in 2.5 cm-thick boards the 40.00%. Boards in free (oblique) position C and D cases in Fig. 4 are washed by the air ow on both sides, and the energy exchange occurs through both sides. In this case, for a 1.5 cm-thick board, the thermal exchange affects the 100.00% of the material, and in 2.5 cm-thick boards the 80.00%. So, the relationship of the percentage of material affected by thermal exchange between case A and B is 1.66, and between case C and D, is 1.25. This explains why with the same mass (10 kg), a 1.5 cm-thick board stores 15% more thermal energy than a 2.5 cmthick board (cladding position), as is shown in Table 4, and this percentage decreases up to 5.8% more in free (oblique) position, Table 5. The inuence of different variables in the stored energy by a board is shown in Figs. 5 and 6. The following variables have been established: Vair = 2 m/s. Percentage by weight of PCMs in boards = 44.5%. The results obtained for a 2.5 cm-thick board for both positions (cladding and free) at two different temperatures (30 C and 35 C) are shown in Fig. 5. The results obtained for a 1.5 cm-thick board are shown in Fig. 6. 3.5. Comparison between different materials Other building elements and materials have been tested to compare their thermal behavior with the one of the gypsum boards with PCMs. The results can be summarized in Table 7 and (Figs. 7 and 8). The slim boards store 17.3% less energy than the thick boards in these conditions. In the case of thermal brick walls, storage surpasses 16%. Under these conditions, thick boards store 13.8% more energy than brick walls. Also, thick boards store 22% more energy than slim boards (1.5 cm thick) and 71.9% more than gypsum boards. Actually, the heat storage capacity of brick walls and gypsum boards is based on the temperature variation of the material itself. As this tends to 0 when the system gets stable, effectiveness gets worse. The energy stored per unit area of each building material is shown in Table 6. Table 6 shows comparison of the energy stored per m2 of building material, (Tin , 3035 C). At 30 C in free (oblique) position, when energy is exchanged through both sides, the thermal storage capacity of a 2.5 cm-thick gypsum board with PCMs is 15.9% lower than that of a thermal brick wall, and it is 12.1% higher than that of a 1.5 cm-thick board,

(wall and ceiling cladding, and room separation). The percentages handled in these experiments far exceed the amounts in previous research (25% by weight, [22]). This has been possible through the addition of other reinforcing materials that guarantee the maintenance of physical and mechanical properties of the gypsum board. The percentages of PCMs expressed by weight are the two highest doses used in the manufacture of boards: 60% and 80% of the weight of the gypsum. Table 3 shows the stored energy by a gypsum board with PCMs depending on the percentage of this material. An increase of 7% in PCMs improves around 20% the board thermal storage capacity, since energy is stored as latent heat. 3.4. Board thickness The boards produced for these tests have the same thickness than conventional gypsum boards: 1.5 cm and 2.5 cm. Tests have been carried out taking into account the same mass of construction material (10 kg), instead of the area (1 m2 ) considered in other trials. Table 4 shows energy stored according to board thickness. Cladding position. Table 5 Energy stored according to position and thickness. Free (oblique) position. Boards in cladding position A and B cases in Fig. 4 are washed by the air ow on one side (indoor side), and the energy exchange occurs through one side. Thermal exchange affects the exterior layer of the material (1 cm of cross-section approximately). That

Fig. 4. Scheme of thermal effects on boards with different thickness and position 5.

Please cite this article in press as: A. Oliver, Thermal characterization of gypsum boards with PCM included: Thermal energy storage in buildings through latent heat, Energy Buildings (2012), doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.026

G Model
ENB-3577; No. of Pages 7

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Oliver / Energy and Buildings xxx (2012) xxxxxx 5

2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0.0

STORED ENERGY GYPSUM BOARDS WITH PCM T= 2 5 cm. PCM 2.5 cm

Tin= 30C Cladding Posi on Tin= 30C Free Posi on Tin= 35C Cladding Posi on
E (kJ)

Tin= 35C Free Posi on

Time (h) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

Fig. 5. Energy stored by 1 m2 of gypsum board with PCMs (2.5 cm thick) for several boundary conditions 6.

2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0.0

1.5 STORED ENERGY GYPSUM BOARDS WITH PCM T= 1 5 cm.

Tin= 30C Cladding Posi on Tin= 30C Free Posi on Tin= 35C Cladding Posi on
E (kJ)

Tin= 35C Free Posi on

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Time (h)

4.0

Fig. 6. Energy stored by 1 m2 of gypsum board with PCMs (1.5 cm thick) for several boundary conditions 6.

2500

2000

1500

FREE SEVERAL MATERIALS STORED ENERGY IN SEVERAL MATERIALS (Tin= 35C) FREE POSITION SB* TB* TBW SP LGB BW

Figure Figure 7

1000 E (kJ) (

500

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Tiime (h)

4.0

Fig. 7. Comparison of the stored energy per m2 of building material. Free (oblique) position, Tin , 35 C 6.

2000 1800 1600 1400 1200

(Tin= STORED ENERGY IN SEVERAL MATERIALS (Tin= 35C) CLADDING POSITION

SB* TB* BW LGB E (kJ) tbw SP

1000 800 600 400 200 0

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Time (h)

4.0

Fig. 8. Comparison of the stored energy per m2 of building material. Cladding position, Tin , 35 C 6.

Please cite this article in press as: A. Oliver, Thermal characterization of gypsum boards with PCM included: Thermal energy storage in buildings through latent heat, Energy Buildings (2012), doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.026

G Model
ENB-3577; No. of Pages 7 6

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Oliver / Energy and Buildings xxx (2012) xxxxxx Tin ( C) Position 30 587.55 705.06 617.05 740.46 160.2 175.80 641.69 718.69 808.22 929.46 161.28 175.8 35 705.06 740.73 1050.9 1402.8 229.05 256.54 878.69 931.41 1452.94 1627.3 219.50 252.42

Table 6 Different materials. Vair , 2.0 m/s; several positions. Stored energy (kJ/m2 ). Material

Slim boards with PCM Thick boards with PCM Gypsum board Brick wall Thermal brick wall Sandwich panel

Cladding Free Cladding Free Cladding Free Cladding Free Cladding Free Cladding Free

In consequence, a 15 m2 partition wall (dimensions: 5 m long 3 m high) built with the new construction material could store 21,000 kJ. This equals to the amount of energy passing through a 25 m2 simple clear glass in a summer day at 15 h, or to the internal loads of 170 people in an ofce; and the thermal losses through night ventilation in a 60 m2 room with one air change per hour, when the difference between indoor and outdoor temperature is 10 C. That means that by using this material, combined with passive strategies air cooling, sunlighting contributes to reduce the energy consumption in a building (heating and cooling) keeping on thermal comfort. Thus, the new construction material is thermally characterized. Its viability and opportunity for manufacturing and commercialization have been demonstrated.

4. Conclusions Comparison between different materials

Table 7 Different materials. Vair , 2.0 m/s; several positions. Stored energy (kJ/kg). MATERIAL Tin ( C) Position Slim boards with PCM Thick boards with PCM Gypsum board Brick wall Thermal brick wall Sandwich panel Cladding Free Cladding Free Cladding Free Cladding Free Cladding Free Cladding Free 30 56.22 67.47 34.67 41.60 13.35 14.62 6.20 6.94 5.57 6.41 15.43 16.82 35 67.47 70.88 59.04 78.81 19.09 21.38 8.49 9.00 10.02 11.22 21.00 24.16

as described in Table 6. Let us remember that 1 m2 of thermal brick wall weights 140 kg, well above the 17.8 kg required to congure a 2.5 cm-thick gypsum board with PCMs. Much of this energy was stored at the initial stage, when the difference between temperatures was higher. At 35 C, the thermal storage capacity of thick boards is 13.8% higher than that of a brick wall, 22% higher than the thermal storage of thin boards, and 71.9% higher than the thermal storage of common gypsum boards. In fact, the thermal capacity of brick walls and common gypsum boards depend on temperature variation of the material itself. As this tends to 0 when the system gets stable, all its effectiveness gets lost. Free (oblique) position: in these conditions, slim boards store 17.3% less energy than thick boards, while the thermal brick wall exceeds 16%. The energy stored per unit mass of each building material (kJ/kg) is shown in Table 7. Table 7 shows comparison of the energy stored per unit mass of building material. In the light of the results shown in Tables 6 and 7, the ideal system chosen for thermal energy storage has been a 2.5 cm-thick gypsum board with PCMs (44.5%) used in free (oblique) position. Since the air ow in the adiabatic box (0.58 m/s) is lower than the maximum ow allowed within the comfort range, the energy provided by the experimental model is well below than in a real situation (12 m/s). The working temperature has been xed at 35 C, which represents a building with high internal and external gains.

- The melting rate of PCM depends on the amount of energy produced, i.e. on the air velocity and temperature of the room, especially in the areas close to the material (walls and ceiling). - Taking into account the boundary conditions, such as indoor air velocity, temperature and so on, the amount of material necessary for microencapsulation can be estimated, so as latent heat storage may be combined with passive heating and cooling strategies to minimize energy consumption in buildings. - A thermal lag is caused by the low conductivity of the material. The lag is related to the rate of phase change and it compensates for the differences between day- and night-time temperatures occurring in continental climates (Madrid). - Air velocity increases the energy ow and the exchange with the material gets improved. A rise of 0.5 m/s in air velocity means an increase of 14% in stored energy. - When the percentage of PCMs in the board is increased from 37.5% to 44.5%, the thermal capacity of the compound material gets improved up to 20% (30 C and 35 C). - Boards and any other construction material should be in contact with the energy ow to get a proper energy exchange. The thermal storage capacity of boards in free (oblique) position is improved up to 33% compared to the results obtained when they are used as cladding elements. - At 30 C, a 1.5 cm-thick gypsum board with 44.5% PCMs stores as much energy as a 12 cm-thick brick wall, and 5 times the energy stored by a common gypsum board. - At 35 C, a 2.5 cm-thick gypsum board with 44.5% PCMs stores as much energy as a 14 cm-thick thermal brick wall. - It is concluded that for the same test conditions, the new gypsum board with 45% PCMs stores 5 times more energy per unit mass than a thermal brick wall, 9.5 times more energy than a brick wall, and almost 3 times more energy per unit mass than a common gypsum board.

References
[1] B. Jones, K. Hsieh, M. Hashinaga, The effect of air velocity on thermal comfort at moderate activity levels, ASHRAE Transactions 92 (1986) 761769, Part 2B (CONF-8606125). [2] S. Mondal, Phase change materials for smart textilesan overview, Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (1112) (2008) 15361550. [3] P. Schossig, et al., Micro-encapsulated phase-change materials integrated into construction materials, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 89 (23) (2005) 297306. [4] M.M. Farid, et al., A review on phase change energy storage materials and applications, Energy Conversion and Management 45 (910) (2004) 15971615. [5] J. Raabe, et al., PolLux: a new facility for soft X-ray spectromicroscopy at the Swiss Light Source, Review of Scientic Instruments 79 (11) (2008), 10 pp.

Please cite this article in press as: A. Oliver, Thermal characterization of gypsum boards with PCM included: Thermal energy storage in buildings through latent heat, Energy Buildings (2012), doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.026

G Model
ENB-3577; No. of Pages 7

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Oliver / Energy and Buildings xxx (2012) xxxxxx 7 [15] C. Chen, et al., A new kind of phase change material (PCM) for energy-storing wallboard, Energy and Buildings 40 (5) (2008) 882890. [16] D. Zhang, S. Tian, D. Xiao, Experimental study on the phase change behavior of phase change material conned in pores, Solar Energy 81 (5) (2007) 653660. [17] D. Feldman, D. Banu, D. Hawes, Development and application of organic phase change mixtures in thermal storage gypsum wallboard, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 36 (2) (1995) 147157. [18] D. Banu, D. Feldman, D. Hawes, Evaluation of thermal storage as latent heat in phase change material wallboard by differential scanning calorimetry and large scale thermal testing, Thermochimica Acta 317 (1) (1998) 3945. [19] M. Ahmad, et al., Experimental investigation and computer simulation of thermal behaviour of wallboards containing a phase change material, Energy and Buildings 38 (4) (2006) 357366. [20] L. Shilei, Z. Neng, F. Guohui, Impact of phase change wall room on indoor thermal environment in winter, Energy and Buildings 38 (1) (2006) 1824. [21] A. Athienitis, et al., Investigation of the thermal performance of a passive solar test-room with wall latent heat storage, Building and Environment 32 (5) (1997) 405410. [22] www.basf.com (cited 2010 20/02/2010). [23] A. Oliver, Incorporacin de Materiales de Cambio de Fase en Placas de Yeso Reforzadas con Fibras de Polipropileno, Aplicacin a Sistemas de Calefaccin y Refrigeracin Pasivos para Almacenamiento de Calor Latente en Edicios, Tesis, Universidad Politcnica de Madrid, 2009.

[6] A. Oliver, F. Neila, A. Garca, Caracterizacin trmica de placas de yeso con material de cambio de fase incorporado, Informes de la construccin 62 (519) (2010) 5566. [7] A.M. Khudhair, M.M. Farid, A review on energy conservation in building applications with thermal storage by latent heat using phase change materials, Energy Conversion and Management 45 (2) (2004) 263275. [8] D.P. Bentz, R. Turpin, Potential applications of phase change materials in concrete technology, Cement and Concrete Composites 29 (7) (2007) 527532. [9] E.M. Alawadhi, Thermal analysis of a building brick containing phase change material, Energy and Buildings 40 (3) (2008) 351357. [10] M. Kenisarin, K. Mahkamov, Solar energy storage using phase change materials, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 11 (9) (2007) 19131965. [11] M. Mazman, et al., Utilization of phase change materials in solar domestic hot water systems, Renewable Energy 34 (6) (2009) 16391643. [12] M. Hawlader, M. Uddin, M.M. Khin, Microencapsulated PCM thermal-energy storage system, Applied Energy 74 (12) (2003) 195202. [13] A. Abhat, Low temperature latent heat thermal energy storage heat storage materials, Solar Energy 30 (4) (1983) 313332. [14] D. Feldman, et al., Obtaining an energy storing building material by direct incorporation of an organic phase change material in gypsum wallboard, Solar Energy Materials 22 (23) (1991) 231242.

Please cite this article in press as: A. Oliver, Thermal characterization of gypsum boards with PCM included: Thermal energy storage in buildings through latent heat, Energy Buildings (2012), doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.026