A.

Bejan
Two Thermodynamic Optima in the
Design of Sensible Heat Units for
Assistant Professor.
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309

Energy Storage
The paper presents a treatment of sensible heat energy storage units as systems intended
to store useful work. An analysis of the thermodynamic irreversibilities associated with
storing energy from a hot gas source as sensible heat in huge liquid baths points out two
important trade-offs: 1. There exists an optimum, well-defined quantity of hot gas to be
used in order to maximize the useful work stored in the liquid bath. Using more than this
optimum quantity in the hope of maximizing the amount of thermal energy stored as sen-
sible heat leads to severe thermodynamics losses. 2. There exists an optimum relationship
among the gas-liquid heat exchanger design parameters which minimizes the system irre-
versibility while maximizing its capability of storing useful work. This relationship pro-
vides a procedure for estimating the heat exchanger optimum number of transfer units
(Ntu). Increasing the iV(„ above the optimum in order to upgrade the heat exchanger effec-
tiveness and the thermal energy storage capability leads to prohibitive losses due to fluid
friction in the heat exchanger channels. The existence of the two optima demonstrates
that designing sensible heat units for maximum thermal energy storage does not necessar-
ily amount to thermodynamically optimizing such systems.

Introduction
Storing energy efficiently is an important contemporary problem.
Efficient storage systems for thermal energy are needed in a wide
variety of applications. In general, it is advantageous and often pos-
sible to store the heat rejected by one thermodynamic process and use
it later as part of the energy input for the same process or an entirely
different one. As shown in [1], thermal energy storage units can be
used in peak power shaving operations: electric power companies are
eager for efficient methods to store the power generated during slack
periods to ease the strain on heavy demand periods.
Of the many possible ways of storing energy for later use, energy
storage in the form of sensible heat is attractive from economic con-
siderations. For peak power shaving applications in particular, heating
large tanks of water or oil and recovering the thermal energy to gen-
erate electricity during maximum demand periods seems the most
attractive alternative [1].
Traditionally, the thermal design and optimization of a sensible
heat storage unit and the associated heat exchanger relies on the view
Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division for publication in the JOURNAL
OF HEAT TRANSFER. Manuscript received by the Heat Transfer Division
October 28, 1977.
that the system thermal performance can be assessed in terms of how
much thermal energy the unit can store. In short, a unit is considered
more effective than another if—for the same heat input and the same
amount of storage material—it is capable of storing more thermal
energy. For example, this point of view served as basis for a recent
proposal for testing the thermal performance of sensible heat (fluid
& solid) storage units [2].
The objective of this article is to analyze the performance of sensible
heat storage units by treating them as systems designed to store useful
work, the function they perform in most applications. The paper
develops the thermal design and optimization of a fluid sensible heat
storage unit and its related heat exchanger based on minimizing (he
waste of useful work (irreversibility, entropy generation) present in
the unit during the storage process. As a prelude to the conclusions
reached in this study it is shown that, depending on the circumstances,
storing the maximum possible amount of thermal energy may come
in direct conflict with the real task of maximizing the storage of useful
work.
It is important to recognize that there exists a great variety of
considerations which must be accounted for in the design of a "good"
storage system. Most of these considerations are either thermody-
namic or economic in nature. The present work addresses only the
thermodynamic side of the design philosophy. We attempt in this
paper to clarify the importance of not disregarding the irreversibility
(second law) aspect associated with the basic storage process.

708 / VOL 100, NOVEMBER 1978 Copyright © 1978 by ASME Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 g a s - liquid heal exchanger from the source until time t,

rce
T. 1
M C,T
z Tou
I I ••
MC ('•>,)

AAA A and y is a parameter characterizing the gas-liquid heat exchanger,

P„+->P '

1
vVV V p0

y = l-e-N«. (4)
The number of transfer units N,u appearing in equation (4) is defined
as
UA
Ntu (5)

Fig. 1 Schematic of hot gas-liquid bath system for energy storage as sensible
heat
For the sake of clarity in illustrating the concepts of useful work
and irreversibility, we will employ as working example a very simple
class of sensible heat systems used for energy storage. The basic ele-
ment is presented in detail in the next section.
E l e m e n t f o r S e n s i b l e H e a t S t o r a g e in L i q u i d P o o l s
Consider the storage system shown schematically on Fig. 1. It
consists of a large liquid bath of mass M and specific heat C placed
in an insulated vessel. Hot gas enters the system through one port,
is cooled by flowing through a heat exchanger immersed in the bath
and is eventually discharged into the atmosphere. Gradually, the bath
temperature T as well as the gas outlet temperature T o u t rise, ap-
proaching the hot gas inlet temperature T„.
The bath is filled with an incompressible liquid such as water or
oil. The stream m carries an ideal gas, for example high temperature
steam or air.
It is assumed that initially the bath temperature equals the envi-
ronment temperature To. The stream of hot gas m is supplied con-
tinuously at T„, Po by an energy source or the exhaust from another
thermodynamic process. The pressure of the hot gas supply must be
raised slightly above atmospheric, Po + AP, so that the gas stream
can overcome the pressure drop caused by friction in the heat ex-
changer.
The time dependence of the bath temperature and the gas outlet
temperature during the storage process can be derived analytically.
The final result is available in the engineering literature and can be
written as [3]
T-T0
l-e-">'
T~ - To
Tout ~ To
= 1-ye-
T„-T0
where 0 represents dimensionless time or the amount of hot gas used
where A is the total heat transfer area on the gas side and U is the
overall heat transfer coefficient based on A.
In addition to the system features mentioned in the beginnin" of
this section, the following simplifying assumptions were needed for
deriving equations (1) and (2). It was assumed that: cp and C are
constant, there is no condensation or vaporization during the process,
the liquid bath is well mixed (isothermal), the overall heat transfer
coefficient U is constant and, finally, the heat capacity of the gas in-
stantly trapped in the heat exchanger is much smaller than the bath
heat capacity MC.
Upon examining expression (1), we see that the ability to store
thermal energy in the system of Fig. 1, T - T0, simply increases with
increasing the charging time 0 and/or the number of transfer units Ntu.
It will be shown in what follows that, from the point of view of maxi-
mizing the storage of useful work, there exist two very important
thermodynamic trade-offs (optima):
• an optimum charging timeffopt>beyond which the loss of useful
work associated with steadily discharging the T o u t gas into the
atmosphere becomes dominant.
• an optimum number of transfer units N,uopl, above which the
loss of useful work due to friction AP in the gas-liquid heat ex-
changer becomes dominant.
D i s s i p a t i o n of U s e f u l W o r k d u r i n g t h e E n e r g y S t o r a g e
Process
The energy storage process illustrated in Fig. 1 has three inherently
lossy (irreversible) features. First, the heat transfer between the hot
gas and the liquid bath always takes place across a finite AT. Second,
the gas stream discharged into the atmosphere is eventually cooled
down to To, again by heat transfer across a finite AT. Third, the gas
flow requires a net AP across the heat exchanger to overcome fric-
tion.
The combined effect of all three irreversibilities makes up a basic
ll)
characteristic of all sensible heat storage systems, namely, only a
fraction of the total useful work carried by the supply stream is
(2) eventually stored in the storage element. The remaining fraction is
dissipated (wasted) through the thermodynamic irreversibilities
present in the system.

-Nomenclature.
Ntu = number of transfer units
A = heat transfer area, gas side Po = atmospheric pressure, absolute U = overall heat transfer coefficient
c p = specific heat at constant pressure AP = pressure drop v = specific volume
C = specific heat of liquid bath >'h = hydraulic radius Wa maximum useful work
/ = friction factor R = ideal gas constant )' = heat exchanger parameter, equation
G = mass velocity s = specific entropy (4)
I = irreversibility, dissipated useful work, S = entropy production, (J/K) 0 = charging time, spent quantity of hot
. w» S = rate of entropy production, (W/K) gas
I - irreversibility rate, dissipated useful t = time P = gas density
mechanical power, (W) T = liquid bath temperature, absolute T = temperature difference, equation (9)
L = flow length To = environment temperature, absolute 0 = specific availability
in = mass flow rate Taut — gas outlet temperature, absolute
To, = gas inlet temperature, absolute Subscripts
M = mass of liquid bath
Nue = Reynolds number AT = temperature difference min = minimum
Nst = Stanton number u = specific internal energy opt = optimum

Journal of Heat Transfer NOVEMBER 1978, VOL 100 / 709

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Quantitatively, the instantaneous rate of useful work dissipation out the optimum set of conditions for minimizing the waste of useful
or irreversibility rate / equals the system rate of entropy generation working during the storage process.
S times the environment absolute temperature [4j, Before proceeding with the analysis it is worth pointing out thai
the ratio //lV m a x , equations (12) and (13), is in effect a Number of
/ = STa (6) Irreversibility Units JVi which quantizes the thermodynamic per-
Performing a second law analysis, the net rate of entropy production formance of the whole storage system. This concept is similar to |.h(>
in the system surrounded by a dashed line on Fig. 1 is Number of Entropy Generation Units Ns introduced first by Ibis
author in the development of the Ns design method for heat ex-
S = mcD In t riiR In ( 1 + changer thermodynamic optimization [7, 8],
' T„
O p t i m u m C h a r g i n g T i m e , dopt
+ — (MC -I mc ,(T„M-T0) (7) The time 0, i.e., the amount of high temperature gas used for
dt To charging the storage element, plays a major role in determining the
where the first two terms represent the entropy change experienced loss of useful work due to heat transfer across a finite temperature
by the ideal gas stream from inlet to outlet, the third term stands for difference. The (IIWma*)xr contribution was plotted on Fig. 2 as a
the time rate of change of the liquid bath entropy, and the last term function of I) for discrete values of T and Ntu. It is apparent that for
accounts for the entropy flux by heat transfer to the environment at a given T and Ntu there exists an optimum 0 when the AT losses reach
temperature To. a minimum. Away from this minimum, U/Wmali)yr tends to unity.
The total entropy generated from the beginning of the charging In the 0 - • 0 limit, the entire useful work content of the hot stream is
process until some instant t is obtained by integrating expression (7) dissipated by heat transfer to the liquid bath which is initially at at-
in time from zero to t. Writing S = J~0 S dt and using equations (1) mospheric temperature. In the 0 -+ <*> limit, the gas stream exits the
and (2) we obtain heat exchanger as hot as it enters; its useful work content is again
dissipated entirely by direct heat transfer to atmospheric tempera-
S R / ±p\
= — In 1 + + r-ln(l + T) ture.
mcpt cp V PJ
+ - | l n [ l + 7-(l-e~>'")] - T(1 •e-y«)\ (8)
0
where T is a dimensionless way of expressing the characteristic tern
perature difference of the problem,
T~ - To
(9)
T«,
^1
Expression (8) shows that the losses accumulated from time zero to w
t depend on three factors, the temperature difference (r), the duration
of the energy storage process (0) and the heat exchanger design (y and
AP/Po). The product riit used in normalizing expression (8) is the total
amount of hot gas used from time zero to t. One can easily combine
equations (8) and (6) to estimate the useful work dissipated during
this time interval, i.e., / = STQ.
We can now compare the dissipated (wasted) fraction STo with the
maximum useful work lV max contained by the hot gas used from time
zero to t. To calculate W max we imagine that the mass of hot gas rht
is processed by one or a succession of reversible devices until its
temperature T„ is lowered to the environment temperature level To.
The maximum work produced in this manner equals the drop in gas
availability [5]

W m a x = m t ( 0 - - <1>Q) (10)

where <p = u + P^v — Tos is the specific availability relative to the (Po,
To) environment. Properties u, v and s are defined in the nomencla-
ture. The net result is

W„ mtcpT0 [T - \n (1 + r)] (11)

1
Combining equations (11) and (8) we arrive at an expression for the T = 2
relative fraction of useful work dissipated during the storage pro-
cess
I _ /R_\ ln(l + AP/P ( N
-+ 1 1\ ^---_ tu= °£ —
Wnmx \cp) T - ln(l + T)
(1 -e~y») - l r e [ l + r(l - e -
(12)
0 [ T - l n ( l + T)]
The first term on the right hand side is the contribution due to fluid
friction AP in the heat exchanger. The remaining two terms account \\ Vs
for losses due to heat transfer across a finite AT. Therefore expression
(12) can be viewed as OS

— = ( — ) + ( — ) U3)
Wmflx \WmaJ*P \WmaJ±T Fig. 2 Fraction of useful work dissipated by heat transfer across a finite
Equations (12) and (13) are the necessary analytical tools for pointing temperature difference

710 / VOL 100, NOVEMBER 1978 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 vK N,u )

T _ T
o .
T„

Fig. 3 Optimum amounts of hot gas (charging time) 0Opt for minimum irre- Fig. 5 Optimum amount of thermal energy stored as sensible heat corre-
versibility due to heat transfer across a finite AT sponding to maximum storage of useful work

heat exchanger of Fig. 1. In expression (13) the AT contribution to

the dissipation of useful work always decreases as the heat exchanger
Ntu increases. At the same time the AP contribution increases with
w„
Ntu- Thus, it is possible to determine an optimum number of transfer
units which minimizes I/Wm!lv_- The optimum Ntu is derived purely
from thermodynamic considerations before proceeding with the actual
heat exchanger design. This is the same thermodynamic trade-off
employed by McClintock [6] and Bejan [7] in optimizing counterflow
heat exchangers as well as heat exchanger with prescribed heat flux
distribution [8].
To illustrate this point, consider the following set of limiting as-
sumptions. First, assume that the overall Ntu is practically equal to
the Ntu for the gas side of the heat exchanger. This is the case where
the thermal resistance between gas stream and liquid bath is domi-
nated by resistance to heat transfer from the stream to the heat ex-
Fig. 4 Minimum fraction of useful work dissipated by heat transfer across changer wall. Under these circumstances, the ratio AP/Po is directly
a finite AT proportional to the number of transfer units

Ntu (14)
An implicit equation for 0„pt can be derived by locating the 0 min- P0 ViVst 2pP 0 /
imum of expression (12). This equation was solved numerically and
where /, Nsi and G are, respectively, the friction factor, Stanton
the result is shown on Fig. 3. The optimum quantity of hot gas used
number and mass velocity for the gas side. Expression (14) was ob-
for charging the sensible heat storage element, 8„pt, is a weak function
tained by eliminating the length to hydraulic radius ratio L/rn from
of the temperature difference r and a relatively stronger function of
the relations defining JV(U and friction factor [9],
Ntu.
At the optimum, 0 = 0 opt , the loss of useful work due to heat transfer Ntu=(L/rn)Nst (15)
across a finite AT assumes the minimum value shown in Fig. 4. Of the
two parameters T and Ntu, the number of transfer units has a more and
sizeable impact on (//W/max)AT,min- We see now that for practical AP/Po = f(Llrn)GV(2PP0) (16)
values of r and N<„ the minimum fraction of useful work dissipated
by heat transfer across a finite AT is consistently greater than 50 The second limiting assumption is AP/Po « 1, allowing us to ap-
percent. According to expression (13), the AP loss is always added to proximate In (1 + AP/Po) by AP/Po in equation (12). Combining this
the minimum AT loss of Fig. 4. Hence, the storage technique shown assumption with equation (14) we have shown that the AP contri-
in Fig. 1 always dissipates at least half of the useful work potential bution to lost useful work is directly proportional to the heat ex-
provided by the energy source. changer Ntu,
If the storage unit operates in the optimum regime, the total
RlcP f G*
amount of thermal energy stored as sensible heat at the end of the Ntl (17)
charging process, MC{Topl - T 0 ), is far from the maximum storage
\WmjM>~ I T• - \n(l + r) Nst2pP0J
capability of the liquid bath, MC(T„ - T0). The optimum thermal By substituting expression (17) in place of the AP term of equation
energy storage corresponding the maximum storage of useful work •(12) we can now derive an expression for the optimum number of
is shown in Fig. 5. In accordance with Fig. 2 and expression (12), if one transfer units for which I/Wmax is a minimum. The result can be
seeks to heat the liquid bath until the stored thermal energy reaches written as
its maximum, T = T„, one runs the risk of storing none or a very small
fraction of the useful work drawn from the high temperature
Hi r c2
f R
N„ (18)
r(l - In
pPo NSi cp
source. 12 pf
If the storage element operates in the optimum regime described in
Heat E x c h a n g e r O p t i m u m N u m b e r of T r a n s f e r U n i t s the proceeding section, the first term appearing in expression (18)
N,tu,opt depends only on T (yOopl is given as a function of r in Fig. 3). This
The irreversibility analysis presented above makes it possible to simple result was plotted on Fig. 6, the optimum number of transfer
identify an important trade-off relevant to optimizing the gas-liquid units decreasing as the mass velocity G increases.

Journal of Heat Transfer NOVEMBER 1978, VOL 100 / 711

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


tu.opt
Fig. 6 Optimum relationship between parameters W(„, G/(2pP 0 ) 1 ' 2 and WRo
for minimum irreversibility in the gas-liquid heat exchanger
Although it is beyond the stated objective of the present treatment
to numerically design a heat exchanger using the chart of Fig. 6, a few
observations may prove instructive. Upon examining equations (15)
and (16), the heat exchanger design rests on selecting three design
parameters, for example Ntu, G/(2pP 0 ) 1 / 2 and the Reynolds number
iVRe which determines both / and Nst- Equation (18) and Fig. 6 pro-
vide an optimum relationship between the three parameters. How-
ever, since for most heat exchanger surfaces the ratio f/Nst is a very
weak function of NR? [7], the optimum relationship is actually a
one-to-one dependence between Ntu and G which, if obeyed, auto-
matically leads to a highly desirable thermodynamic optimum. With
this relationship plus the fact that the selection ofN-g.e has little im-
pact on optimum thermodynamic performance, the heat exchanger
design becomes a considerably more straightforward procedure.
Concluding Remarks
By analyzing the irreversibility associated with storing energy as
sensible heat we have been able to show two important trade-offs
relevant to optimizing this class of thermal systems. We first saw the
optimum amount of high temperature fluid 0 opt which leads to the
maximum storage of useful work in the sensible heat storage unit.
Going beyond this optimum "time of exposure" in the hope of maxi-
mizing the amount of thermal energy stored as sensible heat is
counter-productive. In fact, the thermal energy stored at the time of
maximum useful work storage is only 50 to 70 percent of the maximum
energy storage capability (Fig. 5).
The irreversibility analysis also pointed out the characteristically
lossy features which accompany the technique of storing energy as
sensible heat. Even under the most efficient operating conditions, 0
= Sopt and using a pressure drop-free heat exchanger, the unit stores
less than 50 percent of the useful work potential delivered by the high
temperature source.
712 / VOL 100, NOVEMBER 1978
Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Finally, the irreversibility analysis revealed once again the heat
exchanger trade-off between losses due to fluid friction AP and heal
transfer across a finite AT. This trade-off was translated into a direct
way of calculating the heat exchanger number of transfer units N,u „,,
in terms of other system parameters in order to maximize the fraction
of useful work stored.
As was pointed out in the very beginning, in order to be able to
develop the irreversibility analysis and its conclusions we focused on
probably the simplest class of sensible heat storage units. The basic
element was described in detail in the first section of this article (Fiji.
1). However, the thermodynamic features of this simple system are
also present in more complex versions of the sensible heat energy
storage technique. This is to say that the thermodynamic treatment
of, for example, sensible heat storage in huge liquid pools from a
stream of condensing vapor would unquestionably have led to the
same trade-offs and a similar set of conclusions. Solid units for sen-
sible heat storage could also be optimized according to the method
outlined in this article; the final design conclusions would qualitatively
match the conclusions reached in this study.
Furthermore, consider the process or set of processes by which, later
on, the stored energy is drained from the storage system. It is evident,
that the drainage process carries with it many of the irreversible
features present in the initial storage phase. Therefore, as a suggestion
for further work, it would be interesting and worthwhile to apply the
present irreversibility minimization approach to the thermodynamic
optimization of the drainage process.
Acknowledgment
The author wishes to thank Professor C. L. Tien, Chairman, De-
partment of Mechanical Engineering, University of California,
Berkeley, for many useful comments and words of encouragement.
This work was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship awarded by the
Miller Institute for Basic Research in Science at the University of
California, Berkeley.
References
1 "Shaving the Power Peak," Technology Review, Vol. 79, No. 8, July-Aug.
1977, pp. 68.
2 Kelly, G. E., and Hill, J. E., "Method of Testing for Rating Thermal
Storage Devices Based on Thermal Performance," Report NBS IR-74-634, May
1975.
3 Mueller, A. C, "Heat Exchangers" in Handbook of Heat Transfer,
Rohsenow, W. M., and Hartnett, J. P., Editors, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1973.
pp. 18-31, 18-34.
4 Van Wylen, G. J., and Sonntag, R. E., Fundamentals of Classical Ther-
modynamics, Wiley, New York, 1973, pp. 276, 277.
5 Keenan, J. H., Thermodynamics, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1970,
pp. 289.
6 McClintock, F. A., "The Design of Heat Exchanger for Minimum Irre-
versibility," Paper No. 51-A-108, presented at the 1951 ASME Annual Meet-
ing.
7 Bejan, A., "The Concept of Irreversibility in Heat Exchanger Design:
Counterflow Heat Exchangers for Gas-to-Gas Applications," ASME JOURNAL
OF HEAT TRANSFER, Vol. 99, No. 3, pp. 374-380.
8 Bejan, A., "General Criterion for Rating Heat Exchanger Performance,"
to appear in the International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 21,
1978.
9 Kays, W. M., and London, A. L., Compact Heat Exchangers, McGraw-
Hill, New York, 1964, pp. 33, 35.
Transactions of the ASME