A Constant-Pressure Air Storage Operation Strategy for an Isothermal Compressed Air Energy Storage System Based on a Linear-Drive Liquid Piston

Compressed air energy storage (CAES) systems represent a critical technological solution for addressing power grid load fluctuations by generating electrical power during peak load periods and storing energy during low load periods. As a prominent branch of CAES, isothermal compressed air energy storage (ICAES) systems have attracted significant research attention due to their elimination of requirements for high-temperature storage chambers and high-temperature compressors. Implementing constant-pressure operation in air storage reservoirs not only enhances energy storage density but also improves system safety. However, existing constant-pressure air storage methodologies necessitate supplementary infrastructure, such as high-pressure water reservoirs or elevated hydraulic columns, thereby escalating capital expenditures. This study introduces a novel constant-pressure air storage strategy for ICAES systems utilizing a linear-driven liquid piston mechanism. The proposed approach achieves constant-pressure air storage through the dual-mode operation strategies of buffer tanks (CBA and CBP modes) and hydraulic cylinders (CPP and CPW modes), eliminating the requirement for an auxiliary high-pressure apparatus or extensive civil engineering modifications. A prototype two-stage constant-pressure ICAES architecture was proposed, integrating low-pressure equipment with liquid pistons and providing detailed operational processes for preconditioning, energy storage, and power generation. A comprehensive mathematical model of the system is developed and validated through process simulation and performance characterization of a 100 kWh capacity system. It demonstrates that under operational conditions of 1 MPa of low pressure and 5 MPa of storage pressure, the system achieves an efficiency of 74.0% when the low-pressure equipment and liquid piston exhibit efficiencies of 85% and 90%, respectively. Furthermore, parametric analysis reveals a negative correlation between system efficiency and low-pressure parameters.