TY - JOUR
T1 - A modeling comparison between a two-stage and three-stage cascaded thermoelectric generator
AU - Kanimba, Eurydice
AU - Pearson, Matthew
AU - Sharp, Jeff
AU - Stokes, David
AU - Priya, Shashank
AU - Tian, Zhiting
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors acknowledge the financial support from DARPA ( HR0011-16-C-0035 ) through the MATRIX program.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - In this work, a comparison between the performance of two- and three-stage cascaded thermoelectric generator (TEG) devices is analyzed based on a prescribed maximum hot side temperature of 973 K, an imposed maximum heat input of 505 W, and a fixed cold side temperature of 473 K. Half-Heusler is used as a thermoelectric (TE) material in the top higher temperature stage and skutterudite as a TE in the bottom lower temperature stage for the two-stage structure. Lead telluride is added in the middle stage to form the three-stage structure. Based on the prescribed constraints, the two-stage cascaded TEG is found to produce a power output of 42 W with an efficiency of 8.3%. The three-stage cascaded TEG produces a power output of 51 W with an efficiency of 10.2%. The three-stage cascaded TEG produces 21% more power than the two-stage does; however, if the system complexity, mechanical robustness, manufacturability, and/or cost of three-stage cascaded TEG outweigh the 21% percent power production increase, the two-stage TEG could be preferable.
AB - In this work, a comparison between the performance of two- and three-stage cascaded thermoelectric generator (TEG) devices is analyzed based on a prescribed maximum hot side temperature of 973 K, an imposed maximum heat input of 505 W, and a fixed cold side temperature of 473 K. Half-Heusler is used as a thermoelectric (TE) material in the top higher temperature stage and skutterudite as a TE in the bottom lower temperature stage for the two-stage structure. Lead telluride is added in the middle stage to form the three-stage structure. Based on the prescribed constraints, the two-stage cascaded TEG is found to produce a power output of 42 W with an efficiency of 8.3%. The three-stage cascaded TEG produces a power output of 51 W with an efficiency of 10.2%. The three-stage cascaded TEG produces 21% more power than the two-stage does; however, if the system complexity, mechanical robustness, manufacturability, and/or cost of three-stage cascaded TEG outweigh the 21% percent power production increase, the two-stage TEG could be preferable.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85028600093&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85028600093&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.08.091
DO - 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.08.091
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85028600093
SN - 0378-7753
VL - 365
SP - 266
EP - 272
JO - Journal of Power Sources
JF - Journal of Power Sources
ER -