| Literature DB >> 32605034 |
Peng You1,2, Xiong Li1,2, Yijia Huang1,2, Xiaoliang Ma1,2, Mingbo Pu1,2, Yinghui Guo1,2, Xiangang Luo1,2.
Abstract
Despite their great potential for energy-saving applications, it is still challenging to deEntities:
Keywords: genetic algorithm; multilayer design; optimization strategy; radiative cooling; transfer matrix method
Year: 2020 PMID: 32605034 PMCID: PMC7372352 DOI: 10.3390/ma13132885
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Flow chart of the flexible hybrid optimization strategy (FHOS) for the optimization evaluation. The three parts, the genetic algorithm (GA) (left side), the TM method (upper right) and the evaluation (EV) function (lower right), exchange the information to evaluate the solution candidates.
Figure 2The results of optimized structure. (a) Schematic image of the radiative cooling coating with alternating MgF2 and Si3N4 layers; (b) calculated and computer simulation technology (CST) simulated absorptivity of the radiative cooling coating over visible and near-infrared wavelength ranges, with the AM1.5 solar spectrum plotted for reference. The coating reflects 95% of the incident solar radiation. The inset is the reflectivity(blue), transmittance (black) and the absorptivity (red) of the coating of 0.39–2.5 μm; (c) calculated and CST simulated emissivity/absorptivity of the radiative-cooling coating over mid-infrared wavelengths, with the atmospheric transmittance plotted for reference. The coating emits 76% of the radiation over the mid-infrared atmospheric transparency window. The inset is the reflectivity (blue), transmittance (black) and the absorptivity (red) of the coating of 2.5–14 μm.
Optimized parameters of the proposed structure and parameters of coating I and coating II.
| Number of Layers | Layer = 9 | Total Thickness | H = 1.495 μm | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Layer—i | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Material | silver | MgF2 | Si3N4 | MgF2 | Si3N4 | MgF2 | Si3N4 | MgF2 | Si3N4 |
| Ratio—a | 5.35% | 5.55% | 11.04% | 11.10% | 8.16% | 9.56% | 8.23% | 31.24% | 9.77% |
| h-I/nm | 80 | 165 | 166 | 122 | 143 | 123 | 467 | 146 | 83 |
| h-II /nm | 80 | 83 | 165 | 166 | 122 | 143 | 123 | 467 | 146 |
Figure 3Spectra properties of the radiative cooling material with varying incident angles (θi). (a) Reflectivity of the coating of 0.39–2.5 μm with varying incident angles; (b) absorptivity of the coating of 8–13 μm with varying incident angles; (c) average reflectivity in visible and near-infrared wavelength ranges (0.39–3.5 µm) with the incident angle changes from -90° to 90°; (d) average absorptivity over mid-infrared wavelength ranges (8–13 µm) with the incident angle changes from −90° to 90°.
Figure 4The electric field and magnetic distribution in the simulated material and the ambient. The left side of the dotted line is the domain of the ambient and the right side is the domain of coating. (a,c) Distribution of the magnetic field at frequency of 300 THz and 30 THz, respectively; (b,d) distribution of the electric field at frequency of 300 THz and 30 THz, respectively.
Figure 5Absorption property of two coatings in the vis-infrared bands and mid-infrared bands. (a) Average absorptivity of coating I and coating II in 0.39–2.5 μm is 5%. Absorbed solar irradiance (Ps) of coating I and coating II are 37 W/m2 and 28 W/m2, respectively; (b) average absorptivity of coating I and coating II in 8–13 μm is 76%. Absorbed atmospheric thermal radiation (Pa) of coating I and coating II are 65 W/m2 and 61 W/m2, respectively.
Figure 6Simulated absorptivity of coatings with same materials composition, but different total thicknesses (H) of (a) 0.39–2.5 μm and (b) 2.5–14 μm. Coatings with overlapping MgF2 and Si3N4 layers on top of silver film, with total thickness of 1.5 μm (black solid lines), 1.8 μm (red dashed lines) and 2.0 μm (blue dashed lines). The radiative cooling power densities (P) of these three coatings are 62 W/m2 for 1.5 μm, radiative cooling power–thickness ratio P/H = 41.3; 69 W/m2 for 1.8 μm, P/H = 38.3; and 79 W/m2 for 2.0 μm, P/H = 39.5. Materials distribution of these three coatings are the same to the coating demonstrated in Figure 2.
Figure 7Numerically simulated radiative cooling performance of the structure. (a,b) Calculated net radiative cooling power density (Pcooling) of the coating as a function of material temperature with different heat coefficients (hc), the ambient air temperatures was set as 300 K in (a) and 290 K in (b); (c,d) theoretical calculation for radiative cooling power density as a function of temperature reduction (∆T = Tamb – T), the ambient air temperature is set as 300 K in (c) and 290 K in (d).