Tec 4
Tec 4
Tec 4
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-020-2613-2
K. Venkatesan1 · M. Venkataramanan1
Abstract
The current experimental and simulation studies focus on two distinctive approaches
on developing performance specifications on a typical thermoelectric cooler. The
performance specifications considered for the current study involves cooling capac-
ity, voltage, and current for different temperature ranges on hot side of the mod-
ule. Simulation studies were carried out using COMSOL Multiphysics software for
analyzing the coefficient of performance (COP). Thermoelectric cooler’s perfor-
mance was simulated for the module’s hot side temperature ranges of about 303.15–
333.15 K with a stipulated temperature interval of around 5 K. COP is evaluated at
various temperature ranges (20 K, 40 K, and 60 K) over the module for each tem-
perature prevailing on the hot side. The whole system is numerically modeled and
the final attained results were correlated with the results obtained from simulation.
Factors considered for modeling includes Seebeck coefficient, thermal conductivity,
and resistivity variation of the Peltier elements.
1 Introduction
In recent years, energy crunch along with environmental degradation has driven
the society in search of novel approach of eco-friendly cooling systems. This can
be possible through the evolution of thermoelectric cooling devices and several
researches over it have made the above scenario feasible. A typical thermoelectric
cooler works mainly on the Peltier principle [1–3], i.e., a solid-state convertor gen-
erating a temperature gradient with application of minimal DC voltage [4, 5]. On
application of such low DC voltage, one face of the module becomes colder, while
* K. Venkatesan
venkatmeenergy@gmail.com
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute for Energy Studies, Anna University,
Chennai 600025, India
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
38 Page 2 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
there is a surge in temperature at the other side (Peltier’s effect). Usually, the quan-
tum of heat rejected is always predominant (higher) in comparison with absorbed
heat owing to the fact that former encompasses Joule’s heating (I2R) [6] in addi-
tion to the heat absorbed by the module. Unlike the traditional vapor compression
systems, the solid-state device renders certain convenience such as the absence of
moving parts [7] and lesser system weight [8], thus resulting in improved system
reliability [9], life [10], and negligible maintenance [11]. Atypical thermoelectric
cooler performance is influenced via various factors, namely, thermoelement mate-
rial [12], frame up and contour of thermoelectric legs [13], Seebeck coefficient [14],
and temperature anomaly [15] among the module’s faces (hot and cold) [16]. It is to
be noted that the same thermodynamic laws governs both the thermoelectric cooler
as well as mechanical refrigerants [17]. However, in case of thermoelectric refrig-
eration, different roles are played by the direct current and mobile electrons, the
former playing the compressor’s role [18], while the latter playing the conventional
mechanical refrigerant’s role [19]. The working of thermoelectric cooler is based
on Peltier effect which states that, based on the current direction in the circuit, the
heat is absorbed or rejected [20]. This is perhaps owing to the differences in Fermi
energy level among the conductors [21]. A typical dimensionless parameter named
“figure of merit” defines the quantum of heat absorbed/rejected based on the mate-
rial properties [13, 22]. The equation of figure of merit is ZT = S2ρ−1·K−1T, where
‘ZT’ is figure of merit, ‘S’ is Seebeck coefficient, ‘ρ’ is electrical resistivity, ‘K’ is
thermal conductivity, and ‘T’ is absolute temperature. The count of thermoelement
in a typical thermoelectric module is decided based on the maximum flowing cur-
rent and cooling capacity desirable [23–25]. Generally, for a typical thermoelectric
module, there is a specific quantum of current for which the highest temperature
difference between the module face can be generated [26, 27]. However, exceeding
this current range does not contribute any further cooling effect over and above, but
eventually resulting in improved Joule’s heating (I2R) followed by lowered cooling
capacity [28]. At maximum input current condition, the rigor of module’s cooling
capacity is also at its maximum [15, 29].
The cooling performance characteristics of a typical thermoelectric module were
analyzed by Qian and Ren [30]. They used consecutive layers of bismuth telluride
and pure metals for thermoelectric devices. Ibanez-Puy et al. [31] analyzed on a ver-
tical configured 16 thermoelement module for heating and cooling application in
residential buildings. Moreover, their test confirmed the enormous congruity of the
difference in temperatures between the cells. Joshi et al. [32] exercised the thermo-
electric cooling module in a cartable fresh water generator based mainly on thermo-
electric cooling effect from ambient air using moisture condensation. Ma and Yu
[33] examined the cooling performance of a typical thermoelectric cooler that works
on current pulses (single and square continuous). Cooling at every current pulse dis-
played a surging trend in accordance with the first-order step response. Exempting
the varying initial temperature, the cooling performance at various cooling loads
was quite analogous. A few literature have highlighted the integration of heat pipe
along with thermoelectric module for small-scale cooling applications [34, 35]. In
their study, for removing the heat quantum generated from some power electronic
devices, a typical thermoelectric cooling system is designed. Moreover, as a novel
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 3 of 23 38
(1)
( )
Peltier cooling 𝛼pc , 𝛼pc = SITc
(2)
( )
Peltier heating 𝛼ph , 𝛼ph = SITh
qj = I 2 Relec (3)
( )
Joule heating qj ,
(4)
( ) ( )
Fourier heating qcon , qcon = Th − Tc ∕RThermal
(5)
( )
Thomson effect (qT), qT = 𝛽je l∕k (𝜕ΔT∕𝜕𝜀).
13
38 Page 4 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
Input parameters Simulation of newly developed model for different input conditions
h, Tc
Subsequent Conclusions
2 Model Summary
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 5 of 23 38
For fixing the boundary condition, the hot side of the module and its temperature
were given as input, while for studying the performance characters, parameters such
as COP, module resistance, current (maximum), temperature difference (maximum),
and module heating capacity (maximum) were considered. The hot side temperature
is altered at a range of 303.15–333.15 K with a spell of 5K in a stepped manner.
Figure 4a displays the temperature contour, while the hot side of the module is sus-
tained at 328.15 K. Figure 4b portrays the fluctuation of absorbed heat (Q) at the
cold face module with ΔT (temperature change at module), while the hot side is
maintained constant. Also, the figure interprets that Q max (highest heat capacity) of
the module is generated when ΔT is zero across the module and no heat absorption
via module while the difference in temperature attains a specific maximum point.
This typical temperature range is known as ΔTmax. From the graph, it is also inferred
that Qmax and Tmax are around 2.659 W and 75.64 K, respectively. Figure 4c inter-
prets that ΔT escalates non-linearly with surge in input current (Ic) and attains a
saturation exceeding this, even an increase in I c does not alter the ΔT and the system
is bound to fail as a result of overheating phenomenon. In addition, it is to be noted
that around 3.174A of Ic is required for attaining ΔTmax. Figure 4d exemplifies the
fluctuation of COP of thermoelectric cooler with respect to relative current (i.e., cur-
rent supplied/maximum current). It also correlates the fluctuation of COP during
the occurrences of specific temperature difference across the modules, namely 20 K,
13
38 Page 6 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
Fig. 4 (a) Performance characteristics for 328.15 K on hot face. (b) Variation of Q with ΔT (Th fixed).
(c) Variation of ΔT with input current. (d) COP Vs relative current for ΔT = 20 K, 40 K, 60 K
40 K, and 60 K, and hence the maximum COP occurrence was 1.684 and 0.542,
followed by 0.153, respectively. Moreover, it is observed that ΔT and relative COP
were inversely proportional (i.e., minimal ΔT across the module yields maximized
COP at a specific relative current value).
3 Numerical Modeling
For validating the simulated results, the module is mathematically modeled and a
numerical equation is developed subsequently for verifying the performance param-
eters. By such modeling, it is interesting to note that the TEC performance is widely
affected via Peltier cooling heating, Joule’s heating (I2R), and conduction heat (from
module’s hot to cold face), followed by the Thomson’s effect. It is to interpret that
this modeling is executed ignoring the Thomson’s effect. Equation 6 brings about
the quantum of heat absorbed in the cold face of the module.
QC = ( Sm TC I) − 0.5I 2 Rm − Km ΔT . (6)
( ) ( )
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 7 of 23 38
In the above said equation, ‘SmTCI’ denotes Peltier cooling, ‘I’ refers to input cur-
rent, ‘TC’ is the reduced temperature at the junction, ‘0.5I2Rm’ denotes Joules heat-
ing owing to current passage across the semiconductor material, and ‘KmΔT’ refers
to quantum of heat conducted from module’s hot side to cold face with ‘ΔT’ as tem-
perature gradient. Joule heating and heat conducted are deducted from Peltier cool-
ing as they both produce heating effect, while the Peltier cooling is solely susceptive
for sensible cooling of module surface which subsequently delivers a net cooling
effect. In addition, it can be observable that, when ‘ΔT’ is 0, ‘Qc’ is at its maximum
and vice versa (i.e.,) maximum absorbed heat is achievable when there are same
temperatures prevailing on both hot and cold faces. ‘Imax’ refers to the quantum of
current necessary for producing highest ΔT level. Hence, Eq. 6 can be re-written for
differentiating with respect to I for generating Imax as follows:
dΔT STc
=0 Imax = R
. (7)
dI
The quantum of heat released at the hot side of the module is given via Eq. 8 as
follows:
QH = Sm Th I + 0.5I 2 Rm − Km ΔT . (8)
( ) ( ) ( )
S = S1 + S2 T + S3 T 2 + S4 T 3 … … … (For ΔT = 0) (10)
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
S2 T 2 S3 T 3 S4 T 4
(11)
( )
S = S1 T + + + … … (For ΔT > 0)
2 3 4
13
38 Page 8 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
Using Eq. 10, ‘STh’ and ‘STc’ are evaluated and then ‘S’ of module can be deter-
mined as follows:
( )
STh − STc
S= . (12)
ΔT
Electrical resistance of module (Rm):
( ) ( ) ( )
R2 T 2 R3 T 3 R4 T 4
(14)
( )
R = R1 T + + + … … (For ΔT > 0)
2 3 4
Using Eq. 13, ‘RTh’ and ‘RTc’ are evaluated and ‘R’ (resistance of module) can
be determined as follows:
( )
RTh − RTc
R= . (15)
ΔT
Thermal conductance of module (Km):
K = K1 + K2 T + K3 T 2 + K4 T 3 … … … … (For ΔT = 0) (16)
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
K2 T 2 K3 T 3 K4 T 4
(17)
( )
K = K1 T + + + … … (For ΔT > 0)
2 3 4
Using Eq. 16, ‘KTh’ and ‘KTc’ are evaluated and the thermal conductivity of
module is found as
( )
KTh − KTc
K= (18)
ΔT
10
( )
Seebeck coefficient of module is Sm = S ∗ (19)
71
10 6
( ) ( )
Electrical Resistance of module is Rm = R ∗ ∗ (20)
71 I
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 9 of 23 38
10 I
( ) ( )
Thermal conductivity of module is Km = K ∗ ∗ . (21)
71 6
Substituting Imax in Eq. 6 and putting ΔT = 0,
S2 Tc2
Qmax = . (22)
2R
ΔT is maximum when Q is ‘0’ and I is maximum. Hence, by substituting Q = 0 and
Imax in Eq. 6 we can generate ΔTmax as follows:
S2 Tc2
ΔTmax = . (23)
2KR
Thus by Eq. 23, we can conclude that by ΔTmax, maximum cooling capacity and
input current can be evaluated and the model results are interpreted with COMSOL
Multiphysics simulation software at the next phase of research.
Investigations were done to evaluate (i) distribution of temperature ranges over the
TEC module, (ii) cooling capacity with different, and (iii) COP range at different
relative currents with different ΔT ranges. For validation, the simulating results
were compared with numerical modeling.
Figure 5 shows the variation of is generated cooling capacity with respect to dif-
ferent hot side temperatures. It is generated by supplying maximized input current
to the module and by fixing module’s hot side temperature. Thus, the quantum of
absorbed heat by module in the cold face is shown for varying fixed temperatures
on the module’s hot side. It is to be noted that, with increase in ΔT value, there is
reduction in heat absorbed by the system. Similarly, with increase in Th value, there
is an increase in heat absorbed (at given ΔT value). Thus, it can be said that, for
generating improved cooling capacity at a specified ΔT range, the hot side of the
module should be placed at higher temperature ranges. Table 1 exemplifies the data
of maximum cooling capacity and temperature difference of the system at various
hot side temperatures.
As there is change in temperature across the module (ΔT) and the quantum of power
supplied, the COP is susceptible to change. Relative current is defined as the ratio
of input current to maximum current for attaining maximized cooling capacity.
13
38 Page 10 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
Table 1 Obtained maximum cooling capacity (Qmax) and maximum temperature difference (ΔTmax)
Th (K) 303.15 308.15 313.15 318.15 323.15 328.15 333.15
Figure 6 illustrates the variation of COP with relative current thus paving way for
ΔTmax calculation.
It is inferred from the figure that initially negative COP is attained for TEC at
some quantum of input power. This is perhaps due to the Peltier cooling effect
achieved by the meager input current which is quite lesser than the achieved heating
effect in the module (as a result of Joule’s heating and conduct of heat from hot side
to cold face). Moreover for a specified ΔT value, COP is greater for improved tem-
perature on the module’s hot side. At a specified ΔT range, it can be seen that with
increase in temperature of hot side, the quantum of relative current (where high COP
occurs) shifts towards the left in trend. Then, after attaining the maximized COP at
a certain relative current range, the COP starts deteriorating (even with increase in
input current).
It is inferred from the Fig. 6 that initially negative COP is attained for TEC at
some quantum of input power. This is perhaps due to the Peltier cooling effect
achieved by the meager input current which is quite lesser than the achieved heating
effect in the module (as a result of Joule’s heating and conduct of heat from hot side
to cold face). Moreover for a specified ΔT value, COP is greater for improved tem-
perature on the module’s hot side. At a specified ΔT range, it can be seen that with
increase in temperature of hot side, the quantum of relative current (where high COP
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 11 of 23 38
occurs) shifts towards the left in trend. Then, after attaining the maximized COP at
a certain relative current range, the COP starts deteriorating (even with increase in
input current).
It is interesting to note that, for every configuration, COP level remains neutral
when the module is exposed to highest current level in correspondence to hot side
temperature. Identical curves were generated for maximized ΔT value, but with a
surge in quantum of relative current necessary for generating positive COP for high
ΔT values. In addition, it is observed that highest COP generated for maximum ΔT
levels is quite lower in comparison with highest COP for lesser ΔT ranges across the
module. For obtaining maximum COP, the quantum of supplied relative current is
larger whenever the ΔT across the module is larger.
The temperature contours in Fig. 7 display the fluctuation of temperature across the
module at hot side temperatures of 303.15 K, 313.15 K, 323.15 K, and 331.15 K. In
general, the hot side temperatures are steadily fixed through the adoption of forced
convection (air/water) for desired temperature attainment. It can be inferred from
the figure that the greater the temperature fixation on the module’s hot side, the
greater is the obtained ΔT (difference in temperature) level (during module opera-
tion at highest rated current and voltage). However, here it is clear that ΔT does not
increase linearly with increase in hot side temperature. Hence, it is imperative that
for application pertaining to lower temperatures it is desirable to have lesser tem-
perature on hot side of the module.
13
38 Page 12 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 13 of 23 38
module’s maximum cooling capacity can be generated. Hence, data from COMSOL
Multiphysics simulation and numerical modeling were compared at a temperature
range of 273.15–328.15 K and the results were found to be in par with obtained
results. However, mild deviation is due to the fluctuation in S, K, and ρ values. This
is because in numerical modeling, S, K, and ρ values are evaluated at specific tem-
perature only, while in case of simulation, it is a transient process throughout the
temperatures across the module.
13
38 Page 14 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
5 Conclusion
The present work focuses on the analysis of performance parameters of the ther-
moelectric cooler (TEC) using simulation and numerical modeling. Performance
parameters considered for the current study include maximum current, maxi-
mum cooling capacity, voltage, and coefficient of performance (COP). The TEC
is simulated using COMSOL Multiphysics software for the hot side tempera-
ture ranging about 303.15–333.15 K with 5 K stipulated intervals. For numeri-
cal modeling, parameters namely the resistivity, Seebeck coefficient, and thermal
conductivity were considered. Based on the analysis, the following conclusions
were drawn subsequently:
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 15 of 23 38
Overall, the obtained results were in good agreement with the numerical mod-
eling and COMSOL Multiphysics simulation. The numerical modeling approach
employed herein considers all important temperature-dependent properties that
are necessary to predict the system’s performance with various materials and var-
ious numbers of thermoelements.
Acknowledgements The authors like to thank the Institute for Energy studies, Anna University for pro-
viding technical support for the current investigation. The authors would like to mention that there is no
financial grant received for this research work.
Appendices
Appendix 1
See Table 2.
0.12 0 0.032
323.15 0.15 1.1333 1.038 828 9.094 076
323.15 0.2 1.5795 1.464 962 7.818 506
323.15 0.25 1.6374 1.530 937 6.954 095
323.15 0.3 1.5707 1.459 844 7.593 723
323.15 0.35 1.467 1.297 401 13.07 225
323.15 0.4 1.3508 1.249 915 8.071 337
323.15 0.45 1.2422 1.146 989 8.300 969
323.15 0.5 1.1341 1.051 864 7.818 164
323.15 0.55 1.0397 0.965 242 7.713 928
323.15 0.6 0.9519 0.828 681 14.86 925
323.15 0.65 0.8722 0.775 894 12.41 226
323.15 0.7 0.8004 0.70 517 13.50 448
323.15 0.75 0.7343 0.649 348 13.08 265
323.15 0.8 0.6749 0.580 526 16.25 657
323.15 0.85 0.6197 0.529 222 17.0964
323.15 0.9 0.56 936 0.488 021 16.66 705
13
38 Page 16 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
Appendix 2
See Table 3.
Table 3 DTMax vs hot side TEMP DTmax(math) Dtmax(sim) Relative error % Deviation
temperature
273.15 55.694 53.426 0.042 451 241 4.25
278.15 57.548 55.55 0.035 967 597 3.60
283.15 59.357 57.668 0.02 928 834 2.93
288.15 61.114 59.776 0.022 383 565 2.24
293.15 62.836 61.869 0.015 629 798 1.56
298.15 64.466 63.941 0.008 210 694 0.82
303.15 66.022 65.986 0.00 054 557 0.05
308.15 67.498 67.998 0.007 353 157 0.74
313.15 68.885 69.9755 0.015 584 026 1.56
318.15 70.186 71.911 0.023 987 985 2.40
323.15 71.37 73.823 0.033 228 127 3.32
328.15 73.027 75.648 0.034 647 314 3.46
Appendix 3
See Table 4.
Table 4 Qmax vs hot side TEMP(T) Q math Q simulated Relative error % Deviation
temperature
273.15 1.8602 1.9925 0.06 640 6.64
278.15 1.9207 2.0503 0.06 321 6.32
283.15 1.9798 2.1082 0.06 091 6.09
288.15 2.0375 2.1664 0.05 950 5.95
293.15 2.0934 2.2252 0.05 923 5.92
298.15 2.1475 2.2847 0.06 005 6.01
303.15 2.1997 2.3451 0.06 200 6.20
308.15 2.2496 2.4063 0.06 512 6.51
313.15 2.2972 2.4684 0.06 936 6.94
318.15 2.3422 2.5313 0.07 470 7.47
323.15 2.3845 2.5983 0.08 228 8.23
328.15 2.4238 2.6589 0.08 842 8.84
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 17 of 23 38
Appendix 4
See Table 5.
Table 5 Tc (minimum) vs hot TEMP Tc min(math) Tc min(simu) Relative error % Dev
side temperature
273.15 217.45 219.724 0.0103 1.034 935
278.15 220.6 222.6 0.0090 0.898 473
283.15 223.79 225.48 0.0075 0.749 512
288.15 227.04 228.37 0.0058 0.582 388
293.15 230.31 231.28 0.0042 0.419 405
298.15 233.68 234.21 0.0023 0.226 293
303.15 237.13 237.16 0.0001 0.01 265
308.15 240.65 240.15 0.0021 0.208 203
313.15 244.26 243.175 0.0045 0.446 181
318.15 247.96 246.623 0.0054 0.542 123
323.15 251.78 249.327 0.0098 0.983 849
328.15 255.122 252.502 0.0104 1.037 616
Appendix 5
See Tables 6, 7, 8.
Table 6 Sm for ΔT = 0
TEMP S1 S2T S3T2 S4T3 SM
273.15 0.013 345 − 0.014 683 834 0.055 415 845 − 0.025 911 302 0.028 165 709
274.15 0.013 345 − 0.014 737 591 0.055 822 342 − 0.026 196 928 0.028 232 822
275.15 0.013 345 − 0.014 791 349 0.056 230 324 − 0.026 484 646 0.028 299 329
276.15 0.013 345 − 0.014 845 106 0.056 639 791 − 0.026 774 463 0.028 365 223
277.15 0.013 345 − 0.014 898 863 0.057 050 745 − 0.027 066 386 0.028 430 495
278.15 0.013 345 − 0.014 952 621 0.057 463 183 − 0.027 360 424 0.028 495 139
279.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 006 378 0.057 877 107 − 0.027656583 0.028 559 146
280.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 060 136 0.058 292 517 − 0.027 954 872 0.028 622 509
281.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 113 893 0.058 709 411 − 0.028 255 298 0.028 685 221
282.15 0.013 345 − 0.01 516 765 0.059 127 792 − 0.028 557 868 0.028 747 273
283.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 221 408 0.059 547 658 − 0.028862591 0.028 808 658
284.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 275 165 0.059 969 009 − 0.029 169 474 0.028 869 369
285.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 328 923 0.060 391 846 − 0.029 478 525 0.028 929 398
286.15 0.013 345 − 0.01 538 268 0.060 816 168 − 0.029 789 751 0.028 988 737
287.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 436 437 0.061 241 976 − 0.03 010 316 0.029 047 378
288.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 490 195 0.061 669 269 − 0.030 418 759 0.029 105 315
13
38 Page 18 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
Table 6 (continued)
TEMP S1 S2T S3T2 S4T3 SM
289.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 543 952 0.062098047 − 0.030 736 557 0.029 162 538
290.15 0.013 345 − 0.01 559 771 0.062 528 311 − 0.03 105 656 0.029 219 042
291.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 651 467 0.062 960 061 − 0.031 378 777 0.029 274 817
292.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 705 224 0.063393296 − 0.031 703 214 0.029 329 857
293.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 758 982 0.063 828 016 − 0.032 029 881 0.029 384 154
294.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 812 739 0.064 264 222 − 0.032 358 783 0.0 294 377
295.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 866 497 0.064 701 914 − 0.03 268 993 0.029 490 487
296.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 920 254 0.065 141 091 − 0.033 023 328 0.029 542 509
297.15 0.013 345 − 0.015 974 011 0.065 581 753 − 0.033 358 985 0.029 593 757
298.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 027 769 0.066 023 901 − 0.033 696 909 0.029 644 223
299.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 081 526 0.066 467 534 − 0.034 037 107 0.0 296 939
300.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 135 284 0.066 912 653 − 0.034 379 588 0.029 742 781
301.15 0.013 345 − 0.016189041 0.067 359 257 − 0.034 724 358 0.029 790 858
302.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 242 798 0.067 807 346 − 0.035 071 426 0.029 838 122
303.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 296 556 0.068 256 921 − 0.035 420 798 0.029 884 568
304.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 350 313 0.068 707 982 − 0.035 772 483 0.029 930 186
305.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 404 071 0.069 160 528 − 0.036 126 488 0.029 974 969
306.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 457 828 0.069 614 559 − 0.036 482 821 0.03 001 891
307.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 511 585 0.070 070 076 − 0.03 684 149 0.030 062 001
308.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 565 343 0.070 527 079 − 0.037 202 501 0.030 104 235
309.15 0.013 345 − 0.0 166 191 0.070 985 566 − 0.037 565 863 0.030 145 603
310.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 672 858 0.07 144 554 − 0.037 931 584 0.030 186 098
311.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 726 615 0.071 906 999 − 0.038 299 671 0.030 225 713
312.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 780 372 0.072 369 943 − 0.038 670 131 0.03 026 444
313.15 0.013 345 − 0.01 683 413 0.072 834 372 − 0.039 042 972 0.030 302 271
314.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 887 887 0.073 300 288 − 0.039 418 202 0.030 339 198
315.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 941 645 0.073 767 688 − 0.039 795 829 0.030 375 215
316.15 0.013 345 − 0.016 995 402 0.074 236 574 − 0.04 017 586 0.030 410 312
317.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 049 159 0.074 706 946 − 0.040 558 303 0.030 444 484
318.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 102 917 0.075 178 803 − 0.040 943 164 0.030 477 722
319.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 156 674 0.075 652 145 − 0.041 330 453 0.030 510 018
320.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 210 432 0.076 126 973 − 0.041 720 177 0.030 541 365
321.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 264 189 0.076 603 287 − 0.042 112 343 0.030 571 755
322.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 317 946 0.077 081 086 − 0.042 506 958 0.030 601 181
323.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 371 704 0.07 756 037 − 0.042 904 032 0.030 629 634
324.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 425 461 0.07 804 114 − 0.04 330 357 0.030 657 108
325.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 479 219 0.078 523 395 − 0.043 705 581 0.030 683 595
326.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 532 976 0.079 007 136 − 0.044 110 072 0.030 709 087
327.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 586 733 0.079 492 362 − 0.044 517 052 0.030 733 576
328.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 640 491 0.079 979 073 − 0.044 926 527 0.030 757 055
329.15 0.013 345 − 0.017 694 248 0.08 046 727 − 0.045 338 506 0.030 779 517
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 19 of 23 38
273.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 064 796 − 0.645 283 009 0.450 130 436 0.280 000 631
274.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 068 694 − 0.650 016 409 0.455 092 329 0.280 225 226
275.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 072 592 − 0.654 767 107 0.460 090 553 0.280 468 853
276.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 076 491 − 0.659535103 0.46 512 524 0.280 731 647
277.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 080 389 − 0.664 320 395 0.470 196 523 0.281 013 739
278.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 084 287 − 0.669 122 985 0.475 304 535 0.281 315 263
279.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 088 185 − 0.673 942 872 0.480 449 407 0.281 636 349
280.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 092 084 − 0.678 780 056 0.485 631 272 0.281 977 132
281.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 095 982 − 0.683 634 538 0.490 850 263 0.282 337 744
282.15 0.476 218 − 0.00 109 988 − 0.688 506 317 0.496 106 513 0.282 718 316
283.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 103 778 − 0.693 395 393 0.501 400 154 0.283 118 982
284.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 107 676 − 0.698 301 767 0.506 731 318 0.283 539 875
285.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 111 575 − 0.703 225 437 0.512 100 138 0.283 981 126
286.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 115 473 − 0.708 166 405 0.517 506 746 0.284 442 868
287.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 119 371 − 0.713 124 671 0.522 951 276 0.284 925 234
288.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 123 269 − 0.718 100 233 0.528 433 859 0.285 428 356
289.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 127 167 − 0.723 093 093 0.533 954 628 0.285 952 367
290.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 131 066 − 0.72 810 325 0.539 513 715 0.286 497 399
291.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 134 964 − 0.733 130 705 0.545 111 254 0.287 063 585
292.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 138 862 − 0.738 175 456 0.550 747 376 0.287 651 058
293.15 0.476 218 − 0.00 114 276 − 0.743 237 505 0.556 422 215 0.288 259 949
294.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 146 658 − 0.748 316 852 0.562 135 902 0.288 890 392
295.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 150 557 − 0.753 413 495 0.56 788 857 0.289 542 518
296.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 154 455 − 0.758 527 436 0.573 680 352 0.290 216 461
297.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 158 353 − 0.763 658 674 0.57 951 138 0.290 912 353
298.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 162 251 − 0.76 880 721 0.585 381 787 0.291 630 326
299.15 0.476 218 − 0.00 116 615 − 0.773 973 042 0.591 291 705 0.292 370 513
300.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 170 048 − 0.779 156 172 0.597 241 267 0.293 133 047
301.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 173 946 − 0.784 356 599 0.603 230 605 0.29 391 806
302.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 177 844 − 0.789 574 324 0.609 259 852 0.294 725 684
303.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 181 742 − 0.794 809 346 0.61 532 914 0.295 556 052
304.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 185 641 − 0.800 061 665 0.621 438 603 0.296 409 297
305.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 189 539 − 0.805 331 281 0.627 588 371 0.297 285 551
306.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 193 437 − 0.810 618 195 0.633 778 579 0.298 184 947
307.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 197 335 − 0.815 922 406 0.640 009 358 0.299 107 617
308.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 201 233 − 0.821 243 914 0.64 628 084 0.300 053 693
309.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 205 132 − 0.826 582 719 0.65 259 316 0.301 023 309
310.15 0.476 218 − 0.00 120 903 − 0.831 938 822 0.658 946 448 0.302 016 596
311.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 212 928 − 0.837 312 222 0.665 340 838 0.303 033 688
312.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 216 826 − 0.842 702 919 0.671 776 462 0.304 074 716
313.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 220 724 − 0.848 110 914 0.678 253 452 0.305 139 814
314.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 224 623 − 0.853 536 206 0.684 771 942 0.306 229 113
13
38 Page 20 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
Table 7 (continued)
TEMP K1 K2T K3T2 K4T3 KM
315.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 228 521 − 0.858 978 795 0.691 332 063 0.307 342 747
316.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 232 419 − 0.864 438 682 0.697 933 948 0.308480848
317.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 236 317 − 0.869 915 865 0.70 457 773 0.309643548
318.15 0.476 218 − 0.001240216 − 0.875 410 346 0.711263541 0.310 830 979
319.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 244 114 − 0.880 922 124 0.717991514 0.312 043 276
320.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 248 012 − 0.8 864 512 0.724 761 781 0.313 280 569
321.15 0.476 218 − 0.00 125 191 − 0.891 997 573 0.731 574 474 0.314 542 991
322.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 255 808 − 0.897561243 0.738 429 727 0.315 830 676
323.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 259 707 − 0.90 314 221 0.745 327 672 0.317 143 755
324.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 263 605 − 0.908 740 475 0.752 268 441 0.318 482 361
325.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 267 503 − 0.914 356 037 0.759 252 167 0.319 846 627
326.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 271 401 − 0.919 988 896 0.766 278 982 0.321 236 684
327.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 275 299 − 0.925 639 053 0.773 349 019 0.322 652 667
328.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 279 198 − 0.931 306 507 0.78 046 241 0.324 094 706
329.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 283 096 − 0.936 991 258 0.787 619 288 0.325 562 935
330.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 286 994 − 0.942 693 306 0.794 819 786 0.327 057 486
331.15 0.476 218 − 0.001 290 892 − 0.948 412 652 0.802 064 035 0.328 578 492
332.15 0.476 218 − 0.00 129 479 − 0.954 149 294 0.80 935 217 0.330 126 085
273.15 2.08 317 − 5.429211345 6.370 519 318 − 1.840 603 039 1.183 874 934
274.15 2.08317 − 5.449 087 645 6.417 249 543 − 1.860 892 437 1.190 439 461
275.15 2.08 317 − 5.468 963 945 6.464 150 535 − 1.881 330 393 1.197 026 197
276.15 2.08 317 − 5.488 840 245 6.511 222 293 − 1.901 917 449 1.203 634 599
277.15 2.08 317 − 5.508 716 545 6.558 464 818 − 1.922 654 147 1.210 264 126
278.15 2.08 317 − 5.528 592 845 6.605 878 109 − 1.943 541 028 1.216 914 236
279.15 2.08 317 − 5.548 469 145 6.653 462 166 − 1.964 578 635 1.223 584 386
280.15 2.08 317 − 5.568 345 445 6.70 121 699 − 1.985 767 509 1.230 274 036
281.15 2.08317 − 5.588 221 745 6.74 914 258 − 2.007 108 193 1.236 982 642
282.15 2.08 317 − 5.608 098 045 6.797 238 937 − 2.028 601 228 1.243 709 664
283.15 2.08 317 − 5.627 974 345 6.84 550 606 − 2.050 247 156 1.250 454 559
284.15 2.08 317 − 5.647 850 645 6.893 943 949 − 2.072 046 519 1.257 216 785
285.15 2.08 317 − 5.667 726 945 6.942 552 605 − 2.093 999 858 1.263 995 801
286.15 2.08 317 − 5.687 603 245 6.991 332 027 − 2.116 107 717 1.270 791 065
287.15 2.08 317 − 5.707 479 545 7.040 282 215 − 2.138 370 636 1.277 602 035
288.15 2.08 317 − 5.727 355 845 7.08 940 317 − 2.160 789 157 1.284 428 168
289.15 2.08 317 − 5.747 232 145 7.138 694 892 − 2.183363823 1.291 268 923
290.15 2.08 317 − 5.767 108 445 7.18 815 738 − 2.206 095 176 1.298 123 759
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 21 of 23 38
Table 8 (continued)
TEMP R1 R2T R3T2 R4T3 RM
291.15 2.08 317 − 5.786 984 745 7.237 790 634 − 2.228 983 756 1.304 992 133
292.15 2.08 317 − 5.806 861 045 7.287 594 654 − 2.252 030 106 1.311 873 503
293.15 2.08 317 − 5.826 737 345 7.337 569 441 − 2.275 234 769 1.318 767 327
294.15 2.08 317 − 5.846 613 645 7.387 714 995 − 2.298 598 285 1.325 673 064
295.15 2.08 317 − 5.866 489 945 7.438 031 314 − 2.322 121 197 1.332 590 172
296.15 2.08 317 − 5.886 366 245 7.4 885 184 − 2.345 804 047 1.339 518 109
297.15 2.08 317 − 5.906 242 545 7.539 176 253 − 2.369 647 376 1.346 456 332
298.15 2.08 317 − 5.926 118 845 7.590 004 872 − 2.393 651 726 1.353 404 301
299.15 2.08 317 − 5.945 995 145 7.641 004 257 − 2.41 781 764 1.360 361 473
300.15 2.08 317 − 5.965 871 445 7.692 174 409 − 2.442 145 658 1.367 327 306
301.15 2.08 317 − 5.985 747 745 7.743 515 327 − 2.466 636 324 1.374 301 258
302.15 2.08 317 − 6.005 624 045 7.795 027 012 − 2.491 290 179 1.381 282 788
303.15 2.08 317 − 6.025 500 345 7.846 709 463 − 2.516 107 764 1.388 271 354
304.15 2.08 317 − 6.045 376 645 7.89 856 268 − 2.541 089 622 1.395 266 413
305.15 2.08 317 − 6.065 252 945 7.950 586 664 − 2.566 236 295 1.402 267 424
306.15 2.08 317 − 6.085 129 245 8.002 781 414 − 2.591 548 324 1.409 273 845
307.15 2.08 317 − 6.105 005 545 8.055 146 931 − 2.617 026 252 1.416 285 134
308.15 2.08 317 − 6.124 881 845 8.107 683 214 − 2.64 267 062 1.423 300 749
309.15 2.08 317 − 6.144 758 145 8.160 390 263 − 2.668 481 969 1.430 320 148
310.15 2.08 317 − 6.164 634 445 8.213 268 079 − 2.694 460 843 1.43 734 279
311.15 2.08 317 − 6.184 510 745 8.266 316 661 − 2.720 607 783 1.444 368 133
312.15 2.08 317 − 6.204 387 045 8.319 536 009 − 2.746 923 331 1.451 395 634
313.15 2.08 317 − 6.224 263 345 8.372 926 124 − 2.773 408 028 1.458 424 752
314.15 2.08 317 − 6.244 139 645 8.426 487 006 − 2.800 062 416 1.465 454 944
315.15 2.08 317 − 6.264 015 945 8.480 218 654 − 2.826 887 039 1.47 248 567
316.15 2.08 317 − 6.283 892 245 8.534 121 068 − 2.853 882 436 1.479 516 387
317.15 2.08 317 − 6.303 768 545 8.588 194 248 − 2.881 049 151 1.486 546 553
318.15 2.08 317 − 6.323 644 845 8.642 438 195 − 2.908 387 724 1.493 575 626
319.15 2.08 317 − 6.343 521 145 8.696 852 909 − 2.935 898 699 1.500 603 065
320.15 2.08 317 − 6.363 397 445 8.751 438 388 − 2.963 582 616 1.507 628 327
321.15 2.08 317 − 6.383 273 745 8.806 194 634 − 2.991 440 019 1.514 650 871
322.15 2.08 317 − 6.403 150 045 8.861 121 647 − 3.019 471 448 1.521 670 154
323.15 2.08 317 − 6.423 026 345 8.916 219 426 − 3.047 677 445 1.528 685 636
324.15 2.08 317 − 6.442 902 645 8.971 487 971 − 3.076 058 553 1.535 696 774
325.15 2.08 317 − 6.462 778 945 9.026 927 283 − 3.104 615 313 1.542 703 025
326.15 2.08 317 − 6.482 655 245 9.082 537 361 − 3.133 348 267 1.549 703 849
327.15 2.08 317 − 6.502 531 545 9.138 318 206 − 3.162 257 957 1.556 698 703
328.15 2.08 317 − 6.522 407 845 9.194 269 817 − 3.191 344 926 1.563 687 046
13
38 Page 22 of 23 International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38
References
1. J.H. Meng, X.D. Wang, X.X. Zhang, Transient modeling and dynamic characteristics of thermo-
electric cooler. Appl. Energy 108, 340–348 (2013)
2. T. Gong, L. Gao, Y. Wu, H. Tan, F. Qin, T. Ming, J. Li, Transient thermal stress analysis of a ther-
moelectric cooler under pulsed thermal loading. Appl. Therm. Eng. 162, 114240 (2019)
3. J. Wang, P. Cao, X. Li, X. Song, C. Zhao, L. Zhu, Experimental study on the influence of Pel-
tier effect on the output performance of thermoelectric generator and deviation of maximum power
point. Energy Convers. Manag. 200, 112074 (2019)
4. D. Enescu, E.O. Virjoghe, A review on thermoelectric cooling parameters and performance.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 38, 903–916 (2014)
5. D. Zhao, G. Tan, A review of thermoelectric cooling: materials, modeling and applications.
Appl. Therm. Eng. 66, 15–24 (2014)
6. L.G.L. Ponce, F. Chejne, L.M.R. Aristeguieta, C.A. Gómez, A.F.M. Cano, Predicting a ther-
mal stimulator’s heating/cooling rate for medical applications. Appl. Therm. Eng. 163, 114376
(2019)
7. G. Chen, Y. Tang, Z. Wan, G. Zhong, H. Tang, J. Zeng, Heat transfer characteristic of an ultra-
thin flat plate heat pipe with surface-functional wicks for cooling electronics. Int. Commun. Heat
Mass Transf. 100, 12–19 (2019)
8. P. MohanKumar, V. Jagadeesh Babu, A. Subramanian, A. Bandla, N. Thakor, S. Ramakrishna,
H. Wei, Thermoelectric materials—strategies for improving device performance and its medical
applications. Sci 1, 37 (2019)
9. L. Chen, F. Meng, Y. Ge, F. Sun, Optimum variables selection of thermoelectric generator-driven
thermoelectric refrigerator at different source temperature. Int. J. Ambient Energy 33, 108–117
(2012)
10. A. Şişman, H. Yavuz, The effect of Joule losses on the total efficiency of a thermoelectric power
cycle. Energy 20, 573–576 (1995)
11. S.A. Omer, D.G. Infield, Design optimization of thermoelectric devices for solar power genera-
tion. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 53, 67–82 (1998)
12. X. Lin, S. Mo, L. Jia, Z. Yang, Y. Chen, Z. Cheng, Experimental study and Taguchi analysis
on LED cooling by thermoelectric cooler integrated with microchannel heat sink. Appl. Energy
242, 232–238 (2019)
13. J. Mao, H. Zhu, Z. Ding, Z. Liu, G.A. Gamage, G. Chen, Z. Ren, High thermoelectric cooling
performance of n-type Mg3Bi2-based materials. Science 365, 495–498 (2019)
14. E. Kanimba, Z. Tian, A new dimensionless number for thermoelectric generator performance.
Appl. Therm. Eng. 152, 858–864 (2019)
15. P. Naphon, S. Wiriyasart, C. Hommalee, Experimental and numerical study on thermoelectric
liquid cooling module performance with different heat sink configurations. Heat Mass Transf.
55, 1–10 (2019)
16. A. Fabián-Mijangos, G. Min, J. Alvarez-Quintana, Enhanced performance thermoelectric mod-
ule having asymmetrical legs. Energy Convers. Manag. 148, 1372–1381 (2017)
17. S.M. Pourkiaei, M.H. Ahmadi, M. Sadeghzadeh, S. Moosavi, F. Pourfayaz, L. Chen, M.A. Yazdi,
R. Kumar, Thermoelectric cooler and thermoelectric generator devices: a review of present and
potential applications, modeling and materials. Energy (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energ
y.2019.07.179
18. J. Batra, V. Dabra, P. Sharma, V. Saini, Performance evaluation of thermoelectric refrigerator
based on natural and forced mode of cooling processes, Advances in Fluid and Thermal Engi-
neering (Springer, Singapore, 2019), pp. 317–324
19. Y. Wang, Y. Shi, D. Liu, Performance analysis and experimental study on thermoelectric cooling
system coupling with heat pipe. Procedia Eng. 205, 871–878 (2017)
20. W. He, G. Zhang, X. Zhang, J. Ji, G. Li, X. Zhao, Recent development and application of ther-
moelectric generator and cooler. Appl. Energy 143, 1–25 (2015)
21. K. Wang, E. Meyhofer, P. Reddy, Thermal and thermoelectric properties of molecular junctions,
Advanced Functional Materials (Wiley, Hoboken, 2019), p. 1904534
22. X. Wang, M. Lundstrom, Limitations of zT as a Figure of Merit for Nanostructured Thermoelec-
tric Materials. (2019) arXiv preprint, arXiv:1906.09711
13
International Journal of Thermophysics (2020) 41:38 Page 23 of 23 38
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.
13