4.7 Review

Optical and thermal performance of glazing units containing PCM in buildings: A review

期刊

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
卷 233, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117327

关键词

Glazing units; PCM; Optical performance; Thermal mass; Testing; Modeling

资金

  1. Talent Training Project of Northeast Petroleum University [SJQHB201801]
  2. Scientific Project of Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of China [2018-K1-003]
  3. Team Training Project of Northeast Petroleum University [KYCXTD201901]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glazing units are important for providing passive solar gain and air ventilation in buildings, but their thermal performance is very poor compared to other building components, which results that energy loss from building envelope becomes much more drastic when the glazing area is large. Incorporating phase change material (PCM) in the glazing unit is an effective approach to increase its thermal performance. The glazing unit containing PCM can absorb part of the solar radiation for thermal energy storage while letting the visible radiation enter the indoor ambient for daylighting, which results in reduction of the temperature fluctuations and improvement of the thermal comfort of indoor occupants. A lot of researchers investigated optical and thermal performance of window systems containing PCM in buildings. However, there is a lack of published research review including numerical methods of optical and thermal performance and physical parameters of PCM used in the glazing units, especially for the optical performance of glazing units containing PCM. The present work reviews the experimental and simulation researches on the optical and thermal performance of glazing units containing PCM and discusses the employed research methods, mathematical models and important conclusions drawn. Finally, the challenges and future works of glazing units containing PCM are addressed. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据