A Comprehensive Review On Solar Cookers

A comprehensive review on solar cookers
Erdem Cuce
, Pinar Mert Cuce

School of the Built Environment, University of Nottingham, University Park, NG7 2RD Nottingham, UK
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 24 May 2012
Received in revised form 7 August 2012
Accepted 2 September 2012
Available online 1 October 2012
Keywords:
Solar cooker
Efciency
Cooking power
PCM
Exergy
a b s t r a c t
In this paper, a thorough review of the available literature on solar cookers is presented. The review is
performed in a thematic way in order to allow an easier comparison, discussion and evaluation of the
ndings obtained by researchers, especially on parameters affecting the performance of solar cookers.
The review covers a historic overview of solar cooking technology, detailed description of various types
of solar cookers, geometry parameters affecting performance of solar cookers such as booster mirrors,
glazing, absorber plate, cooking pots, heat storage materials and insulation. Moreover, thermodynamic
assessment of solar cooking systems and qualitative evaluation of thermal output offered by solar cook-
ers are analyzed in detail. Complex designs of solar cookers/ovens with and without heat storage material
are illustrated and furthermore possible methods to be able to enhance the power outputs of solar
cooking systems are presented. Feasibility analysis, environmental impacts and future potential of solar
cookers are also considered in the study.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Energy is a thermodynamic quantity that is often understood as
the capacity of a physical system to do work. Besides its physical
meaning, energy is vital for our relations with the environment
[1]. Research to resolve problems related to energy is quite signif-
icant since life is directly affected by energy and its consumption
[2]. Fossil fuel-based energy resources still predominate with the
highest share in global energy consumption. However, clean
energy generation becomes more and more crucial day by day
due to the growing signicance of environmental issues. Especially
after the oil crisis of 1973 with soaring fuel prices, a strong stimu-
lation of research into renewable energy technologies is observed.
Currently, renewable energy resources supply about 14% of total
world energy demand and their future potential is remarkable
[3,4]. Among the clean energy technologies, solar energy is recog-
nized as one of the most promising choice since it is free and
provides clean and environmentally friendly energy [1,510]. The
Earth receives 3.85 million EJ of solar energy each year [11]. Solar
energy offers a wide variety of applications in order to harness this
available energy resource. Among the thermal applications of solar
energy, solar cooking is considered as one of the simplest, the most
viable and attractive options in terms of the utilization of solar
energy [12].
Wood is still the primary energy source in much of the develop-
ing world since it is seen the cheapest way to obtain the energy
required. However, this situation causes some serious ecological
problems such as deforestation [13]. Especially in rural areas of
Africa, a major amount of total available energy resource is utilized
for cooking. The energy required for cooking is supplied by non-
commercial fuels like rewood, agricultural waste, cow dung and
kerosene [14]. Similarly, in India, energy demand for cooking ac-
counts for 36% of total primary energy consumption. As reported
by Pohekar et al. [15], 90% of rural households in India are still
dependent on biomass fuels. People in rural areas are left no choice
but to walk several kilometers every day to collect rewood. On
the other hand, people in urban areas spend too much money on
rewood which can be considered a major expenditure especially
for poor families. Besides the environmental and economic burden
of rewood use, there are some serious health problems such as
burns, eye disorders and lung diseases originate from the utiliza-
tion of rewood [13]. It is also emphasized by the World Health
Organization (WHO) that 1.6 million deaths per year are caused
by indoor air pollution [16]. Therefore, there is a rising attention
concerning the renewable energy options to meet the cooking
requirements of people in developing countries. It is well-known
that most of the thickly populated countries from the developing
part of the world are blessed with abundant solar radiation with
mean daily illumination intensity in the range of 57 kW h/m
2
and have more than 275 sunny days in a year [17,18]. From this
point of view, it can be easily said that solar cookers have a big po-
tential in these countries in order to meet the energy demand
especially in the domestic sector. In addition, utilization of solar
cookers provides many advantageous like no recurring costs, high
nutritional value of food, potential to reduce drudgery and high
durability [17]. Hence, in this paper, a comprehensive review of so-
lar cooking technology is presented. Appropriate recommenda-
0306-2619/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.09.002
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: laxec5@nottingham.ac.uk (E. Cuce).
Applied Energy 102 (2013) 13991421
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Applied Energy
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ apener gy
tions are made in order to enhance current performance of solar
cookers and future potential of this technology is evaluated.
2. Historic overview of solar cooking
The history of solar cookers goes back to the eighteenth century.
Halacy and Halacy [19] reports that the rst experiments on solar
cookers were carried out by a German Physicist named Tschirn-
hausen (16511708). In 1767, FrenchSwiss Physicist Horace de
Saussure attempted to cook food via solar energy. He constructed
a miniature greenhouse with 5 layers of glass boxes turned upside
down on a black table and reported cooking fruit [20]. English
astronomer Sir John Herschel attempted to cook food in a similar
insulated box on an expedition to South Africa in 1830. A French
Mathematician Augustin Mouchot integrated the heat trap idea
with that of the burning mirror in 1860 and built an efcient solar
oven. He also succeeded to create a solar steam engine but it was
too large to be practical. In 1876, W. Adams developed an octago-
nal oven equipped with 8 mirrors and he reported that the oven
cooked rations for 7 soldiers in 2 h [21]. One year later, Mouchot
designed solar cookers for French soldiers in Algeria, including a
shiny metal cone, made from a 105.5 section of a circle [20]. He
also wrote the rst book on Solar Energy and its Industrial Applica-
tions. In 1891, Clarence Kemp, an American plumbing and heating
manufacturer, invented the rst commercial solar water heater for
bathing and dishwashing. In 1894, Xiaos Duck Shop in Sichuan,
China, roasted ducks via the principle of solar cooking.
In 1930s, France sent many solar cookers to its colonies in Afri-
ca. On the other hand, India began to investigate solar energy as an
option for avoiding deforestation. In 1940s, Dr. Maria Telkes in the
USA analyzed various types of solar cookers including some heat
storage materials also published a book named Solar Ovens in
1968 [19,20]. The rst commercial box-type solar cooker was
produced by an Indian pioneer named Sri M.K. Ghosh in 1945
[22]. In 1950s, Indian researchers devised and constructed com-
mercial solar ovens and solar reectors, but they were not readily
accepted due to the lower-cost alternatives. Also, United Nations
Food and Agriculture Association (FAO) investigated water-heating
capacities of a parabolic cooker and an oven type cooker. In 1961, a
United Nations Conference on New Sources of Energy including
many authorities on solar cooking technology was held. In 1970s,
as a result of the increasing fuel prices due to the oil crisis, an
intensive interest on renewable energy technologies was observed
worldwide especially in China and India [23]. Barbara Kerr in the
USA constructed several types of concentrating and box-type solar
cookers using recycling materials and aluminium foil. In 1979,
water pasteurization was performed using box-type solar cookers
by Dr. Metcalf and his student Marshall Longvin. In 1980s,
especially the Governments of India and China expanded national
promotion of box-type solar cookers. Heather Gurley Larson wrote
rst US solar cookbook, Solar Cooking Naturally, in 1983 [20].
Mullick et al. [24] presented a method to analyze the thermal per-
formance of solar cookers in 1987. In 2000, Funk [25] proposed an
international standard for testing solar cookers. It was observed
that the resulting solar cooker power curve is a useful device for
evaluating the capacity and heat storage ability of a solar cooker.
Especially in recent years, intensive efforts have been made to be
able to enhance the cooking power capacity of solar cookers.
Numerous analytical, numerical and experimental studies on novel
designs of solar cookers have been carried out by many research-
ers. Today, solar cooking technology is very promising with its
potential in order to narrow the gap between renewable and con-
ventional power sources.
3. Solar cookers
A solar cooker or solar oven is a device which utilizes solar
energy to cook food. Solar cookers also enable some signicant
processes such as pasteurization and sterilization. It is a clear fact
that there are countless styles of solar cookers in the world and
they are continually improved by researchers and manufacturers.
Therefore, classication of solar cookers is a hard work. However,
it may be asserted that most of the solar cookers today fall within
three main categories called solar panel cookers, solar box cookers
and solar parabolic cookers as shown in Fig. 1.
3.1. Solar panel cookers
Solar panel cookers may be considered the most common type
available due to their ease of construction and low-cost material. In
solar panel cookers, sunlight is concentrated from above [26]. This
method of solar cooking is not very desirable since it provides a
limited cooking power. On the other hand, this type of solar cook-
ers is highly appreciated by people living or travelling alone. Solar
panel cookers utilize reective equipment in order to direct sun-
light to a cooking vessel which is enclosed in a clear plastic bag.
Solar panel cooker of Dr. Roger Bernard (CooKit) is one of the most
popular designs in this category [17]. Only cardboard and foil
shaped was utilized to manufacture the CooKit. It was an afford-
able, convenient and effective solar cooker which enabled to
preserve nutrients without burning or drying out. Bernard also
investigated how the solar cooking technology is taken up by pop-
ulations [27]. Performance of solar panel cookers highly depend on
reected radiation thus, they do not seem effective under cloudy
conditions [28]. In recent years, some efforts have been made in or-
der to expand the utilization areas of panel cookers. Kerr and Scott
[29] designed and built a solar powered apparatus for sterilization.
They also indicated that the prescribed system can be used for
cooking and food preserving purposes.
Fig. 1. Types of solar cookers: (a) solar panel cooker; (b) solar parabolic cooker; and (c) solar box cooker.
1400 E. Cuce, P.M. Cuce / Applied Energy 102 (2013) 13991421
3.2. Solar box cookers
History of solar cooking technology started with the invention
of box-type solar cookers. The rst solar box cooker was invented
by a FrenchSwiss naturalist named Horace de Saussure in 1767.
Especially in the twentieth century, this solar cooker type demon-
strated a considerable development in terms of design and perfor-
mance parameters. A solar box cooker basically consists of an
insulated box with a transparent glass cover and reective surfaces
to direct sunlight into the box [20]. The inner part of the box is
painted black in order to maximize the sunlight absorption. Maxi-
mum4 cooking vessels are placed inside the box [30,31]. A detailed
description of solar box cookers is illustrated in Fig. 2. Each compo-
nent of the box cooker has a signicant inuence on cooking
power. Therefore, optimization of these parameters is vital for
obtaining maximum efciency.
It is observed from the cooker designs of 1950s that the food is
directly exposed to sunlight [3234]. Telkes [35] focused on box
type cookers and noted that they are slow to heat up, but work
well even where there is diffuse radiation, convective heat loss
caused by wind, intermittent cloud cover and low ambient temper-
atures [36]. At the beginning of 1960s, Schaeffer [37] presented a
report on the current situation of solar box cookers. In the follow-
ing years, outdoor testing of box-type solar cookers was carried out
by several researchers [3842]. Garg et al. [43] compared
performances of ve available solar cookers [44].
After the 1980s, researchers especially focused on optimization
of geometry parameters of solar box cookers since they have a
dominant effect on performance. In this context, some researchers
analyzed the booster mirror effect on efciency of box-type solar
cookers. Dang [45] investigated the concentrators for at plate
collectors and explained that booster mirrors can be utilized in or-
der to increase the efciency of solar collectors since it provides ex-
tra solar radiation. The results indicated that the effectiveness of
concentrators highly depends on the angle of mirrors. Garg and
Hrishikesan [46] presented a comprehensive analysis of a system
consisting of a at plate collector integrated with two reectors.
They proposed a model which was numerically simulated for con-
ditions prevailing in three different Indian stations for three differ-
ent months. They found that the enhancement is maximum for the
month of December in all the three stations for both horizontal and
tilted surfaces. Narasimha et al. [4750] comprehensively analyzed
the solar cookers augmented with booster mirrors. They provided a
single adjustable booster mirror to a solar box cooker and
calculated the total energy falling on the cooking aperture for the
latitude of 18N (Warangal City, India) and for ve different decli-
nations of the sun. The results showed that the total energy was
enhanced at all hours of the day by intermittent adjustment, con-
tinuous adjustment and xed orientation of the supporting mirror
[47]. They also analyzed elongation effect (ratio of length/width of
booster mirror) on total energy collection. Rectangular apertures
were found more efcient than the equal are of square aperture
in terms of total energy absorbed. On the other hand, the efciency
was approximately the same for a value of elongation [48]. Energy
contribution by the booster mirror became increasingly signicant
with an increase in latitude of the location [49]. El-Sebaii et al. [51]
constructed and tested a box-type solar cooker with multi-step
inner reectors. A transient mathematical model was proposed
for the cooker. The transient performance of the cooker was deter-
mined by computer simulation for typical summer and winter days
in Tanta, Egypt. They observed that the cooker is able to boil 1 kg of
water in 24 min when its aperture area equals 1 m
2
. Habeebullah
et al. [52] introduced an oven type concept to minimize the
amount of heat losses and maximize the concentrated solar energy.
They expressed that if the solar box cooker is augmented with four
booster mirrors, heat losses due to wind will reduce since wind
will not be in direct contact with the glazed surface. Results of
the mathematical model indicated that oven type receiving pot
has both a higher uid temperature and overall receiver efciency
compared to the bare receiver type, working under similar condi-
tions. El-Sebaii and Aboul-Enein [53] presented a transient mathe-
matical model for a box-type solar cooker with a one-step outer
reector hinged at the top of the cooker. The model was based
on analytical solution of the energy balance equations using
Cramers rule for different elements of the cooker. The boiling
and characteristic boiling times of the cooker were decreased by
50% and 30%, respectively, on using the cooker around midday.
Buddhi et al. [54] designed and analyzed a solar cooker augmented
with three reectors and a phase change material storage unit. The
experimental results showed that late evening cooking is possible
in the solar cooker proposed. Algifri and Al-Towaie [55] carried out
a research in order to nd out effect of the cooker orientation on its
performance. The analysis was applied to a cooker placed at Aden,
Yemen. They found that the reector tilt angle and the elevation
angle are related by the relationship 3R 2a 180
and the cooker

which satises this condition gives the best performance. Mirdha
and Dhariwal [56] theoretically investigated several designs of
solar cookers in order to optimize their performance. Various com-
binations of booster mirrors were analyzed as shown in Fig. 3 to be
able to arrive at a nal design, aimed at providing a cooker, which
can be xed on a south facing window. The results indicated that
the proposed new cooker can provide higher temperature through-
out the day and round the year. They also noted that the cooker can
be used for preparation of two meals in a day and to keep the food
warm in late evening.
Some researchers focused on glazing factor in solar box cookers
[5762]. It is well known from the literature that there are various
glazing materials such as glass, breglass, and acrylics which are
commonly used in box-type solar cookers. Single pain glass and
double pain glass are the most common structures which enable
to receive a higher solar transmission. Optimization of the gap
between panes is a signicant problem since a large air gap may
encourage convective heat transfer and cause a heat loss. In litera-
ture, recommended air gap depth varies from 1 to 2 cm [20,5759].
Absorption of long wave radiation emitted by collector plates in-
creases the glass temperature and this increment causes heat loss
from the cooker to the surrounding atmosphere. Therefore, trans-
parent insulating materials are suggested in order to improve the
efciency of solar box cookers [63,64].
Absorber tray is one of most signicant component of a solar
box cooker. Solar radiation passes through the glazing part and ab-
sorbed by a surface painted black called absorber tray. An absorber
tray rst of all should have a remarkably high absorptivity in order
Fig. 2. Components of a solar box cooker [20].
E. Cuce, P.M. Cuce / Applied Energy 102 (2013) 13991421 1401
to transfer maximum radiant energy to food in the cooking pot
[65,66]. Harmim et al. [67] experimentally investigated a box-type
solar cooker with a nned absorber plate as shown in Fig. 4. Tests
were carried out on the experimental platform of the Renewable
Energies Research Unit in Saharan Environment of Algeria at Adrar.
The results indicated that solar box cooker equipped with ns was
about 7% more efcient than the conventional box-type solar coo-
ker. The time required for heating water up to boiling temperature
was reduced about 12% when a nned absorber plate was used.
Comparative results are illustrated in Fig. 5. Pande and Thanvi
[68] designed, developed and tested an efcient solar cooker. The
signicant part of the proposed cooker was its stationary mode
and maximum capture of energy through improved design and
optimum tilt of the system. They found that the cooker could save
about 40% of the cooking fuel via the proposed absorber. Shrestha
[69] concluded that if the external surface of the absorbing top
plate is treated with selective coating, it demonstrates a better
performance compared to the simple black coated absorber tray.
Fig. 3. (a) Conventional box-type solar cooker with south facing mirror; (b) solar box cooker with south tilted collecting surface and south facing mirror; (c) cooker with south
tilted collecting surface and north facing mirror; and (d) cooker with south tilted collecting surface, north facing mirror and a xed south facing vertical mirror [56].
Fig. 4. (a) Schematic of the nned absorber plate; (b) conventional (A) and improved (B) solar box cooker [67].
Thulasi Das et al. [70,71] carried out some simulation analysis on
performance parameters of solar box cookers like the thickness
and size of the absorber plate, emissivity of the vessels and insula-
tion thickness. Anderson et al. [72] investigated performance of
coloured solar collectors. They showed that coloured solar collector
absorbers can make remarkable contributions to heating loads.
Although their thermal efciency is lower than highly developed
selective coating absorbers, they offer the advantage of sensitive
integration with buildings. Tripanagnostopoulos et al. [73,74] also
analyzed coloured absorbers. They obtained that unglazed collec-
tors with coloured absorbers are in general of low efciency and
might be used in low temperature solar applications. Amer [75]
presented a novel design of solar cooker in which the absorber is
exposed to solar radiation from the top and the bottom sides. A
set of plane diffuse reectors was used to direct the radiation onto
the lower side of the absorber plate. Results under the same oper-
ating conditions showed that the absorbers of the solar box cooker
and the double exposure cooker attain 140 and 165 C, respec-
tively. Kumar [76] carried out a thermal analysis in order to eval-
uate natural convective heat transfer coefcient in a trapezoidal
enclosure of box-type solar cooker. It was underlined that the
major advantage of using a trapezoidal shaped absorber tray is
the absorption of a higher fraction of incident solar radiation falling
on the aperture at larger incident angles, due to a more exposed
surface area. Ogunwole [77] designed, constructed and test a solar
cooker which absorber was a square base pot, blackened with
smoke and was made of stainless steel. In the design, aluminium
foil was used as reectors. An average temperature of 100 C was
obtained from the cooker for an ambient temperature of 34 C.
Any type of cooking vessel can be used in solar box cookers but
generally cylindrical shaped cooking vessels made of aluminium or
copper are recommended. As reported by Saxena et al. [20], num-
ber of cooking vessels in a solar box cooker may vary depending on
the quantity and the nature of the food. Khalifa et al. [78]
conducted some experiments on an Arafa cooker, basically a point
focus concentrator featured with Pyrex pots. The tracking was per-
formed manually for every 1520 min. It was observed that cook-
ing food by directly reected solar radiation decreases the cooking
time. Gaur et al. [79] revealed that performance of a solar cooker
may be improved if a utensil with a concave shape lid is used in-
stead of a plain lid. Narasimha Rao and Subramanyam [80,81]
investigated effects of some modications on cooking vessels and
analyzed performance enhancement of solar box cookers. They ob-
served that raising the cooking vessel by providing a few lugs
would make the bottom of the vessel a heat transfer surface. This
change would improve the performance of the system by improv-
ing the heat transfer rates in both heating and cooling modes [80].
They also found that cooking vessel with central annular cavity on
lugs performs much better than the conventional vessel kept on
the oor of the cooker [81]. Reddy and Narasimha Rao [82] com-
pared performances of conventional solar box cooker and im-
proved cooker having cooking vessel with central annular cavity
as it is illustrated in Fig. 6. The experiments were conducted for
several days using water and thermic uid as working medium.
The results indicated that when the vessel with central annular
cavity is placed on lugs in the cooker interior, the hot air circulation
through the gap between the bottom of the cooking vessel and the
oor of the cooker and through the central annular cavity improves
the heat transfer to the water in the vessel and results in the reduc-
tion of cooking time. Harmim et al. [83] experimentally investi-
gated a box-type solar cooker with two different cooking vessels:
the rst one conventional and the second one identical to the rst
in shape and volume but its external lateral surface augmented
with ns. They found that cooking time considerably reduces with
the nned design. The average difference in power was calculated
7.49 W. Srinivasan Rao [84] analyzed the effects of ns attached
inside the central cavity on cooker performance. A maximum tem-
perature gain of 17 C was observed with new design of cooking
vessel in comparison of conventional type.
Some researchers performed intensive efforts on solar box
cookers in order to allow late evening cooking. In this context, a
great deal of solidliquid phase change materials (PCMs) were
investigated for heating and cooling applications [8592]. At the
end of 1980s, Ramadan et al. in Tanta University [93] augmented
Fig. 5. (a) Finned and ordinary absorber plate temperatures and (b) comparison between internal air temperatures of cooker A and internal air temperatures of cooker B
[67].
Fig. 6. Solar box cooker with a conventional cylindrical cooking vessel on the oor
of the cooker and another vessel with central annular cavity kept on three lugs
spaced at 120 [82].
a simple at plate solar cooker with a jacket of sand as heat storage
material. They observed a considerable longer cooking period with
heat storage medium. Six hour per day of cooking time was
reported. Haraksingh et al. [94] used coconut oil as the heat trans-
fer uid in a double-glazed at plate collector solar cooker. Tem-
peratures of approximately 150 C were achieved between 10:00
and 14:00. Nandwani et al. [95] constructed a solar hot box with
two similar compartments. They compared the behaviour of a
metallic slab lled with a phase change material for short term
storage with that of a conventional absorbing sheet. Advantage of
the heat storage material could not be conrmed due to some rea-
sons like high transition temperature and low quantity of PCM as
well as losses while opening the door. Sharma et al. [96] investi-
gated thermal performance of a prototype solar cooker based on
an evacuated tube solar collector with PCM storage unit. The de-
sign had separate parts for energy collection and cooking coupled
by a PCM storage unit as shown in Fig. 7. It was observed noon
cooking did not affect the evening cooking and evening cooking
using PCM heat storage was found to be faster than noon cooking.
They also noted that the system is expensive but shows good po-
tential for community applications. Hussein et al. [97] experimen-
tally investigated a novel indirect solar cooker with outdoor
elliptical cross section integrated indoor PCM thermal storage
and cooking unit. Magnesium nitrate hexahydrate (T
m
= 89 C,
latent heat of fusion 134 kJ/kg) was used as the PCM inside the
indoor cooking unit of the cooker. They found that the cooker pro-
posed can be used for heating or keeping the meals hot at night and
early morning for breakfast of the next day. Chen et al. [98] numer-
ically studied PCMs used as the heat storage media for solar box
cookers. Magnesium nitrate hexahydrate, stearic acid, acetamide,
acetanilide and erythritol were selected as PCMs. For a two-dimen-
sional simulation model based on the enthalpy approach, calcula-
tions were made for the melt fraction with conduction only.
Stearic acid and acetamide were found to be good compatibility
with latent heat storage system. It was also noted that the initial
temperature of PCM does not have very important effects on the
melting time. El-Sebaii et al. [99] utilized acetanilide and magne-
sium chloride hexahydrate as PCM in solar box cooker and ob-
tained 134 C of stagnation temperature. They also presented
transient mathematical models of single slope-single basin solar
still with and without PCM under the basin liner of the still
[220]. Oturanc et al. [100] constructed and tested a solar box coo-
ker which uses engine oil as heat storage material. It was observed
that the cooker was successful to cook only light meal like rice,
eggs macaroni, etc. under the climatic conditions of Turkey.
Mawire et al. [101,102] carried out some simulation studies on
an oil-pebble bed thermal energy storage system for a solar cooker.
It is well known from the literature that insulation is one of
most crucial key points for a solar cooker to provide an efcient
cooking [103,104]. Insulation in a solar box cooker should not be
limited to the walls of the frame box and absorber tray since a
remarkable amount of heat loss occurs through the glazing [20].
In this context, Nahar et al. [105,106] carried out some studies
on utilization of transparent insulation material (TIM) in solar
box cookers. Under an indoor solar simulator, they tested a hot
box solar cooker with glazing surface consisting 40 and 100 mm
thick TIM. The stagnation temperature with the 40 mm TIM was
found to be 158 C, compared with 117 C without the TIM [105].
A double reector hot box solar cooker with TIM was designed,
constructed, tested and its performance was compared with a
Fig. 7. Schematic of the solar cooker based on evacuated tube solar collector with PCM storage unit [96].
single reector hot box solar cooker without TIM. Fig. 8 depicts the
eld installation of the proposed cookers. 40 mm thick honeycomb
made of polycarbonate capillaries was placed between two glazing
surfaces in order to minimize the heat loss due to convection. The
efciencies were determined to be 30.5% and 24.5% for the solar
box cooker with and without TIM, respectively. Energy saving by
using a solar cooker with TIM was estimated to be 1485 MJ of fuel
equivalent per year [106]. Mishra and Prakash [107] evaluated the
thermal performance of solar cookers with four different insulation
materials readily available in rural areas. Their performance was
compared with that of the glass wool. It was aimed at minimizing
the cost of the cooker with a view to enhance its widespread appli-
cation in the rural Indian environment. Bjork and Enochsson [108]
experimentally investigated three different insulation materials
(glass wool, melamine foam and corrugated sheets of cellulose
plastics) in terms of condense formation, drainage and moisture
dependent heat transmittance. It was noted that the all materials
provide best insulation in dry form. Nyahoro et al. [109] carried
out a simulation study on an indoor, institutional solar cooker.
The cooker storage unit consisted of a cylindrical solid block and
it was insulated by a material with thermal conductivity of
0.1 W/mK and specic heat capacity of 1000 J/kgK.
3.3. Solar parabolic cookers
The rst solar parabolic cooker was developed by Ghai [110] in
the early 1950s at the National Physical Laboratory, in India. Then,
Lof and Fester [111] investigated various geometries and mounting
congurations of parabolic cookers. These type of cookers attracted
people immediately all over the world due to their outstanding
performance. Solar parabolic cookers can reach extremely high
temperatures in a very short time and unlike the panel cookers
or box cookers, they do not need a special cooking vessel. However,
a parabolic cooker includes risk of burning the food if left unat-
tended for any length of time because of the concentrated power.
A solar parabolic cooker simply consists of a parabolic reector
with a cooking pot which is located on the focus point of the cooker
and a stand to support the cooking system.
Ozturk [112115] conducted several experimental researches
on solar parabolic cookers and analyzed the performance parame-
ters in terms of thermodynamic laws. Ozturk experimentally
examined energy and exergy efciencies of a simple design and
the low cost parabolic cooker under the climatic conditions of
Adana which is located in Southern Turkey (at 37N, 35E). The
energy output of the parabolic cooker was determined to be
20.978.1 W, whereas its exergy output was in the range of 2.9
6.6 W. The results showed that the energy and exergy efciencies
of the parabolic cooker were calculated between 2.815.7% and
0.41.25%, respectively [114]. He also compared energy and exergy
efciencies of box-type and parabolic-type solar cookers. Experi-
mental study indicated that the power output of the box-type coo-
ker ranged from 8.2 to 60.2 W, whereas it varied between 20.9 and
73.5 W for the parabolic cooker. On the other hand, the exergy out-
put of the solar box cooker ranged from 1.4 to 6.1 W, whereas it
was in the range of 2.9 to 6.6 W for the parabolic cooker. It was also
observed that the energy and exergy efciencies of the box-type
and the parabolic-type cookers were in the range of 3.0535.2%,
0.583.52% and 2.7915.65%, 0.41.25%, respectively [115]. Arenas
[116] described a portable solar kitchen with parabolic solar reec-
tor that folded up into a small volume. The experimental study
indicated that the solar cooker reached an average power output
of 175 W, with an energy efciency of 26.6%.
Al-Soud et al. [117] designed, operated and tested a parabolic
cooker with automatic two axes sun tracking system. The test
results showed that the water temperature inside the cookers tube
reached 90 C when the maximumregistered ambient temperature
was 36 C. A parabolic cooker was investigated from the exergy
viewpoint by Petela [118]. According to the results, the exergy
efciency of parabolic cooker was relatively very low approxi-
mately 1% while the energy efciency ranged from 6% to 19%. Shu-
kla [119] presented the energy and exergy efciencies of two types
of parabolic solar cookers which were tested in summer and winter
in the climatic conditions of India. The results showed that the en-
ergy output of the community and domestic solar cookers varied
from 2.73 to 43.3 W and 7.77 to 33.4 W, respectively whereas
the exergy output of the cookers ranged from 1.922.58 W to
0.651.45 W, respectively. On the other hand, the energy efcien-
cies of the community and domestic solar cookers were in the
range of 8.310.5% to 7.114.0%, respectively. Pohekar and Rama-
chandran [120] conducted a survey about present dissemination
of nine cooking energy alternatives in India to compare their
technical, economic, environmental/social, behavioural and com-
mercial issues. Liqueed Petroleum Gas (LPG) stove was found
the most preferred device, followed by kerosene stove, solar box
cooker and parabolic solar cooker in that order while electric oven
had the lowest ranking. They also determined utility assessment of
parabolic cooker as a domestic cooking device in India. The study
indicated that if the parabolic cookers have to become a reality
Fig. 8. (a) Double reector solar box cooker with TIM and (b) conventional hot box solar cooker [106].
the utility has to be increased. They stressed that the advantages of
parabolic cookers in terms of technical, behavioural and commer-
cial should be improved [121].
4. Different designs of solar cooking systems
In recent years, researchers highly focused on producing novel
designs of solar cookers to provide the most appropriate operating
conditions and hence obtain efcient cooking. Nahar et al. [122
129] presented numerous studies to enhance the performance of
solar cookers with low cost modications. Khalifa et al. [130,131]
also conducted some studies on new design concentrating type so-
lar cookers. Tiwari and Yadav [132] devised a new box-type solar
cooker integrated with a single reector at the hood. In their de-
sign, the base of the oven acted as the lid unlike the conventional
solar box cooker and hence the problem of preheating was solved
as faced in conventional box-type solar cooker. The results showed
that the newly designed cooker was more efcient compared to the
conventional cooker. Nandwani [133] experimentally and theoret-
ically investigated a solar oven in the climatic conditions of Costa
Rica. The cooker was augmented with a reector to increase the
illumination intensity on absorbing plate. Maximum plate temper-
ature measured was between 130 and 150 C. Thermal efciency of
the cooking system varied from 30% to 40%. At University of Jordan
in the early 1990s, Al-Saad and Jubran [134] developed a low cost
clay solar cooker. The most outstanding features of the cooker were
that it was made cheap, locally available materials. In addition, no
skilled labour was in need in order to operate the cooker. In their
design, absorber plate of the cooker was replaced with locally
available black stones. Using black stones instead of absorber plate
allowed storing solar energy, hence making late cooking possible.
Grupp et al. [135] presented a novel box-type solar cooker con-
sisted of a xed cooking vessel in good thermal contact with a con-
ductive absorber plate. The novel cooker provided easier access to
the cooking pots and less maintenance due to the protection of all
absorbing and reecting surfaces. Outdoor tests also indicated that
5 L of water per m
2
of opening surface could be brought to full boil-
ing in less than 1 h. Nandwani and Gomez [136] experimentally
investigated two folding and light solar ovens constructed by Solar
Box Cookers International (SBCI) in the climatic conditions of Costa
Rica. Performances of the cookers were compared with a conven-
tional oven during 30 days. The tests were conducted at load and
no load condition, and with or without a reector. Cardboard ovens
were found to be 1525% less efcient than the conventional oven.
Wareham [137] developed a solar cooker stove called
SUNSTOVE which is an affordable, easy to use, suitable for family,
rugged and stackable for shipping. By using the SUNSTOVE, the re-
duce fuel consumption decreased the cost of living and helped to
improve the health of the people. The unit of SUNSTOVE held four
pots with 2 L. The cooker pasteurized water in 15 min at 71 C and
it did not burn foods. The cookers sides had wings to increase the
solar collecting area to provide for the elimination of reectors and
to reduce internal volume to be heated [137]. Beaumont et al. [138]
designed a family sized ultra-low cost solar cooker in Tanzania. The
hot box style cooker was developed to be built on site by the users
with minimal tools, skills or special materials. The cooker consisted
of a shallow 1 m
2
square hole in the ground, insulated with straw
and lined with adobe, a glass or plastic roof and a 1 m
2
aluminized
plastic reector with guy ropes for adjustment. It provided cooked
for 1012 people on clear days with midday and dusk. A 4 L load of
water brought up to cooking temperature in 6070 min. Suharta
et al. [139] designed three different solar cookers called HS 7534,
HS 7033 and the newest design HS 5521. They carried out various
experiments for comparison of these cookers cooking performance
and the other parameters. It was calculated oven temperature of
202 C between 12:00 and 12:45 p.m. on October in 1997 for type
of HS 7033. It was found that these solar cookers have a good heat
storage capability; therefore they can be used for consecutive
cooking. Volume of HS 5521 was 35% of HS 7033s and it was
cheaper than HS 7033. Although it was seen that HS 5521 had
the same heat collection rate with the others, it was able to cook
as fast as HS 7033. Sonune and Philip [140] developed a Fresnel
type domestic SPRERI concentrating cooker. The cooker was found
capable of cooking food for a family which consisted of 4 or 5 peo-
ple. The highest plate bottomtemperature was calculated 255 C in
approximately 40 min while ambient temperature was 30 C and
direct solar radiation was 859 W/m
2
. Negi and Purohit [141] com-
pared the performances of a conventional box type cooker and a
concentrator cooker. The experimental results obtained showed
that the concentrator solar cooker provided stagnation tempera-
ture 1522 C higher than the conventional box type cooker using
a booster mirror. It was also observed that the boiling point of
water with concentrator cooker is reached faster, by 5055 min,
than the conventional box type cooker. It was seen that the solar
cooker utilizing non-tracking reectors provided increased heat
collection and faster cooking compare to the conventional box type
cooker.
El-Sebaii and Ibrahim [142] experimentally tested a solar box
cooker for two different congurations under the weather
Fig. 9. Schematic diagram of (a) cylindrical and (b) rectangular box-type of solar cookers [145].
conditions of Tanta, Egypt. The experiments were conducted
during July 2002 with and without load. The cooking power (P)
was correlated with the temperature difference (DT) between the
cooking uid and the ambient air. Linear correlations between P
and DT had correlation coefcients higher than 0.90 satisfying
the standard. It was also underlined that the improved cooker
was able to cook many kinds of food with an overall efciency of
26.7%. In Cornell University, Rachel Martin et al. [143] devised no-
vel solar ovens for the developing world. Different types of solar
ovens like x cooker, bowl cooker, cone cooker, box type cooker
and parabolic type cooker were constructed and tested in Nicara-
gua in fall of 2005 and the spring of 2006. Nandwani [144] de-
signed, constructed and tested a hybrid multifunctional solar
cooking system in Costa Rica. The device proposed enabled cook-
ing, drying and heating/pasteurizing purposes in a single system.
Kurt et al. [145] experimentally investigated the effect of box
geometry on performance of solar cookers. Two different model
solar box cookers, which are in rectangular and cylindrical geome-
tries as shown in Fig. 9 were constructed using the same material
and tested under the same operating conditions. Performance
parameters of each cooker were determined for 0.5, 1 and 1.5 kg
of fresh water. The thermal efciency increased from 12.7% to
36.98% for cylindrical and 9.85% to 28.25% for rectangular model,
when the amount of water was increased from 0.5 to 1.5 kg. The
cylindrical model provided higher thermal efciency and lower
characteristic boiling time than the rectangular model. Schwarzer
and Silva [146] described four types of solar cookers (at plate
collector with direct use, at plate collector with indirect use, par-
abolic reector with direct use, parabolic reector with indirect
use) in terms of their basic characteristics and test procedures.
They also presented a simplied analytical model to design simple
cooking systems.
At Sardar Patel Renewable Energy Research Institute, Kumar
et al. [147,148] designed, fabricated and tested a novel solar box
cooker: truncated pyramid-type solar cooker. The truncated
pyramid geometry illustrated in Fig. 10 allowed concentrated the
illumination intensity towards the bottom and the glazing surface
on the top facilitated the trapping of energy inside the cooker. One
of the salient features of the novel cooker was to totally eradicate
the need of a solar tracking system. Maximum absorber plate stag-
nation temperature was determined to be 140 C and water tem-
perature inside the cooker reached 98.6 C in 70 min. In addition
two gures of merit, F
1
and F
2
were found to meet the standards
prescribed by the Bureau of Indian Standards for solar box-type
cookers. They also observed the nancial viability of the device
via a simple economic analysis [148]. Bello et al. [149] investigated
performance analysis of a simple solar box cooker in the climatic
conditions of Nigeria. The average efciency of the cooker was esti-
mated to be 47.56%. It was recommended that the device proposed
might be used as a pre-cooking and alternative to domestic
cooking stove.
Grupp et al. [150] developed a metering device for the determi-
nation of solar cooker use rate. The device allowed recording food
temperature, ambient temperature and illumination intensity le-
vel. Moreover, the assessment of fuel savings and greenhouse-gas
emission reduction compared to other cooking options was avail-
able with the proposed system. Zhou and Zhang compared the
performances of two different solar cooking systems by simulation
method: solar energy storage vessel between vacuum tube
collector and plate collector. The temperature distribution, energy
releasing rate and liquid fractions during the energy releasing pro-
cess were compared for summer and winter conditions. The plate
collector storage vessel was found more reliable and suitable for
the climatic conditions of Nanjing [151]. Kurt et al. [152] estimated
performance parameters of solar box cookers with and without
reector using articial neural network. The experimental data
set consisted of 126 values. 96 values were used for training/learn-
ing of the network and the rest of the data for testing/validation of
the network performance. The results indicated that the thermal
performance parameters of a solar cooker can be determined with
a high degree of accuracy via articial neural network.
Hernandez-Luna and Huelsz [153] developed a solar oven for
the intertropical zones and evaluated its performance. Tempera-
ture measurements of the oven were performed using 36 thermo-
couples type T and the data was recorded by a data acquisition
system. Cooking tests showed that the oven is suitable to cook
three basic Mexican meals: beans, nixtamal and corn cobs. A con-
servative estimation of the wood savings per solar oven is 850 kg
per year which accounts for the 30% rewood used to cook by a
typical Mexican rural family. Prasanna and Umanand [154,155]
proposed a hybrid solar cooking system where the solar energy
was transported to the kitchen. The thermal energy source was
used to supplement the Liqueed Petroleum Gas (LPG) which
was in common use in kitchens. In the prescribed system, solar en-
ergy was transferred to the kitchen by means of a circulating uid.
Energy gain from the sun was maximized by changing the ow rate
dynamically. It was concluded from the results that as using the
novel cooking system proposed, cooking can be carried out at
any time of the day with time taken being comparable to conven-
tional systems. Saitoh and El-Ghetany [156] devised a solar water-
sterilization system with thermally controlled ow. They carried
out a heat transfer analysis in order to determine the effects of
environmental conditions on the behaviour of the system. Thermal
and biological tests of the water samples during the sterilization
process were obtained. It was found that the proposed system
can be used in clear-sky areas with a high illumination intensity
potential to produce a large amount of sterilized water. Chaudhuri
[157] estimated the electrical backup for an Indian solar cooker to
be able to use the cooker throughout the year. It was found that
approximately 160 W heater would be sufcient for cooking.
Abu-Malouh et al. [158] designed, constructed and tested a spher-
ical type solar cooker augmented with automatic sun tracking sys-
tem. The system components are illustrated in Fig. 11. The
experimental results indicated that the temperature inside the
pan reached more than 93 C in a day where the maximum ambi-
ent temperature was 32 C. It was underlined that this temperature
is suitable for cooking purposes and was obtained by means of a
two axes solar tracking device. All measured parameters in the
study are depicted in Fig. 12. As it is easily seen from the results
for three different days, temperature inside pan and temperature
outside pan have almost the same behaviour as a function of time.
Fig. 10. Schematic diagram of truncated pyramid-type solar cooker [147,148].
On the other hand, ambient temperature increases from morning
till noon and then it gradually decreases till sunset. In University
of Nigeria, Ekechukwu and Ugwuoke [159] designed and con-
structed a solar box cooker and analyzed its performance for with
and without plane reector. The experiments were carried out
with four cooking vessels each capable of holding 1 kg of water.
Absorber plate temperatures with and without reector were
found to be 138 and 119 C, respectively. Boiling times for 1 kg of
water were determined to be 3600 s and 4200 s for with and with-
out reector, respectively. Jaramillo et al. [160] developed a novel
solar cooker for intertropical zones called optogeometrical design.
In their design, the oven box had seven faces instead of the six
faces of most common designs reported in the literature. The most
outstanding feature of this oven was that the oven needed only
four simple movements to be able to obtain sufcient solar con-
centration throughout the year. The results showed that, at noon,
the solar cooker achieves a concentration level greater than 1.95
during the whole year. Mohamad et al. [161] constructed and
tested a simple wooden, hot box solar cooker with one reector
under the climatic conditions of African Sahel Region. It was ob-
served that the cooker reached 160 C under eld conditions of
Giza, Egypt. Different types of foods were successfully cooked such
as rice, meat, sh, and beans. The cooking time varied from 1 to
2.5 h. Hussain et al. [162] investigated performance analysis of a
box-type solar cooker with auxiliary heating. The reason of using
an auxiliary heater was the cloudy days in Bangladesh which make
solar cooking impossible. Six heating elements were connected in
series to generate 150 W heat from 220 V AC source and were
placed below the absorber plate. It was found that the use of
auxiliary heating equipment allows cooking on most cloudy days.
Schwarzer et al. [163] developed indoor and outdoor solar cookers
with or without storage as shown in Fig. 13 for families and
institutions in different countries of the world. Thermal storage
was provided with a tank which was lled with pebbles. Vegetable
oil was used as the working uid which ows in cooper pipes.
Approximately 250 systems were constructed in various sizes
and installed in different countries for different purposes. It was
stressed in the study that large-scale use of solar cookers in devel-
oping countries can only be possible through the development
with nancial aid.
5. Performance analysis of solar cookers
Thermal performance of solar cookers can be determined by an
elaborate analysis of the optical and thermal characteristics of the
cooker materials and the cooker design or by experimental testing
under operating conditions [20]. However, as stated by Lahkar and
Samdarshi, it is very difcult to compare the cookers performance
reported by previous researchers and establish the criteria re-
quired for selection of a cooker which can provide a successful
and satisfactory cooking [12]. There are some performance param-
eters such as energy and exergy efciency, cooking power, gures
of merit, and parameter index which are commonly used for
performance investigation of solar cooking systems. These param-
eters have been analyzed theoretically and experimentally by
many researchers in order to provide the most appropriate operat-
ing conditions for solar cookers.
5.1. Theory of solar cookers
In the mid of 1980s, overall utilizable efciency for a solar box
cooker was developed by Khalifa et al. [164] and presented by the
following formula:
g
u

Q
F
Q
in
1
where Q
F
is the useful heat stored in the food for a temperature rise
of DT. Q
in
is the solar input and for a constant illumination intensity
level G
NR
, collector area A
c
and cooking time Dt, it is determined as
follows:
Q
in
G
NR
A
c
Dt 2
For the mass of water M, the specic boiling time t
s
and the charac-
teristic boiling time t
c
are calculated by the Eqs. (3) and (4),
respectively.
t
s

DT A
c
M
3
t
c

t
s
G
G
NR
4
Fig. 11. Spherical type solar cooker: (a) the whole system; (b) the pan and the dish; and (c) the control devices [158].
G
NR
is a reference radiation level and commonly taken to be
900 W/m
2
. G
is the average illumination intensity level. There

are two gures of merit F
1
and F
2
which are largely used for eval-
uating thermal characteristics of any solar cooker type. The rst
gure of merit F
1
is determined by conducting the no load stagna-
tion temperature test and given as follows [12]:
F
1

T
ps
T
a
G
5
In Eq. (5), T
ps
and T
a
are maximum absorber plate temperature
and average ambient temperature, respectively. The second gure
of merit F
2
is obtained by the full load water heating test as follows
[12]:
F
2
F
0
g
0
C
R

F
1
MC
w
As
ln
1 1=F
1
T
w1
T
a
=G
1 1=F
1
T
w2
T
a
=G
_ _
6
where F
0
is heat exchange efciency factor, g
0
is optical efciency,
C
R
is heat capacity ratio, (MC)
w
is product of the mass of water
and its specic heat capacity, A is absorber area, s is time interval,
T
w1
is initial temperature of water and T
w2
is nal temperature of
water. It can be concluded from Eq. (6) that the second gure of
merit is more or less independent of climatic variable. Eq. (6) can
be rearranged in terms of time constant s
0
as follows [12]:
s
0

F
1
MC
w
AF
2
ln
1 1=F
1
T
w1
T
a
=G
1 1=F
1
T
w2
T
a
=G
_ _
7
The measurements required to estimate the F
1
and F
2
are
illumination intensity falling on the surface of solar cooker, ambient
Fig. 13. (a) Outdoor cooker with thermal storage installed in an elementary school
in northern Chile, South America; (b) outdoor cooker without thermal storage
installed in Mali, Africa; and (c) indoor solar cooker with three circular pots (80, 40
and 20 L) and one rectangular at pot (60 L) installed in a school in Nicaragua,
Central America [163].
Fig. 12. Variation of (a) ambient temperature; (b) illumination intensity level; (c)
temperature inside pan; and (d) temperature outside pan with time [158].
temperature, wind speed, initial water temperature and nal water
temperature. Mullick et al. [165] carried out some tests in order to
determine the F
2
through the experimental data. They observed that
the F
2
increases with increase in number of cooking vessels if load is
kept constant and equally distributed. This is attributed to an
improvement in the heat exchange efciency factor (F
0
) with
number of cooking vessels [12]. Funk [25] developed a cooking
power expression for solar cookers as follows:
P
MC
w
dT
w
dt
8
where P is the cooking power, M is the mass of water, C
w
is specic
heat of water, dT
w
is temperature difference of water and dt is the
time interval. Funk [25] also presented a term called standard cook-
ing power which is given as follows:
P
s

700MC
w
DT
600G
9
where P
s
is the standard cooking power and DT is the temperature
difference. It is clear from the Eq. (9) that in order to calculate the
standard cooking power, the reference illumination intensity level
should be 700 W/m
2
. Patil et al. [166] developed an expression for
the cooking time using the standard cooking power:
s
MC
w
C
3
N
ln
P
s
T
w1
P
s
T
w2
10
where N is number of pots and C
3
is coefcient which characterizes
the solar cooker. Nahar [18,106] developed an expression in order
to determine the efciency of solar cookers:
g
MC
w
M
1
C
u
T
w2
T
w1
CA
_
s
0
Gdt
11
where g is the efciency of the cooker, M
1
mass of cooking utensil,
C
u
is specic heat of cooking utensil, C is concentration ratio and G is
the illumination intensity. A brief of the reported expressions by
several researchers on performance parameters of solar cookers is
given in Table 1.
5.2. Analytical models of solar cookers
In Indian Institute of Technology, Yadav and Tiwari [167] car-
ried out a simple transient analysis to get the overall picture of
the performance of solar box cookers. They found that the time
required to obtain the stagnation temperature is largely dependent
on the heat capacity of water or the ingredient to be cooked in the
cooking vessel. If the heat capacity of the contents of the cooking
vessel has greater value, then the cooking period becomes long.
Medved et al. [168] presented a new solar heater named SOLAR-
BALL which was shaped as an inatable hemisphere. A mathemat-
ical and numerical model was developed to analyse solar radiation
and heat transfer in such a solar heater. The numerical model was
veried by a series of experiments. It was found that typical optical
efciency and overall heat transfer coefcient of the hemispherical
solar heater are between 0.450.50 and 0.61.6 W/m
2
K, respec-
tively. The time required for the preparation of hot drinks and
heating of food was found entirely acceptable. Kablan [169] evalu-
ated energy saving potential of solar water heating systems in
Jordan between the years of 20012005. He calculated that the to-
tal savings over the entire period are estimated to be 46.28 million
US$ if solar water heaters are used instead of commonly used LPG
powered cookers. Diallo et al. [170] theoretically investigated the
performance analysis of a solar cooker with tilted walls. The north-
ern side wall was tilted at an angle of 38 and other walls were
tilted at an angle of 9 relative to the vertical. All these walls were
covered with a thin reective aluminium lm. Theoretical results
were in agreement with the experimental results with an inaccu-
racy less than 2%. Fared et al. [171] presented a mathematical mod-
el based on an electric resistances analogy which describes and
simulates the thermal behaviour of a solar stove. The mathematical
model included three different heat transfer mechanisms between
different surfaces of the solar stove and the environment. The pro-
posed model allowed predicting the solar stove entropy generation
and its efciency.
Saitoh and El-Ghetany [156] constructed a solar water-steriliza-
tion system with thermally controlled ow and analyzed it theo-
retically and experimentally. Thermal and biological tests of the
water samples during the sterilization process were obtained.
Overall efciency of the hot box solar cooker was found to be
35%. Effect of the plate thickness on the performance of the cooker
was theoretically investigated. The results indicated that crucial
parameters for the solar water-sterilization system are the level
of contamination of water, type of bacteria, type and size of the
transparent water container, the intensity of solar radiation, the
water temperature inside the transparent container, the quantity
of water being exposed, environmental conditions, exposure dura-
tion and water ow rate.
Recently, Lahkar et al. [219] have developed a novel perfor-
mance parameter called cooker opto-thermal ratio (COR) based
on HottelWhillierBliss (HWB) equation. A single step test proce-
dure has been used to obtain COR and to establish its utility in
inner-cooker comparison, box type (BC) and concentrating type
(CC) solar cookers have been tested initially. COR has been dened
as follows:
Table 1
Thermal performance parameters, their expressions developed by several researchers and range of values [12].
Author Parameters Expression Range of values
1. Mullick et al. [24] F
1
Tps T
a
G
0.120.16 m
2
K/W
F
2
F
0
g
o
C
R

F1MC
w
As
ln
11=F1Tw1T
a
=G
11=F2Tw2T
a
=G
_ _
0.2540.490
2. Funk [25] P
s
700MCwDT
600G
348.83 W at DT = 50 C
3. Khalifa et al. [164] g
u
Q
f
/Q
in
7.429.6%
t
s
DTAc
M
25.84385.757 min m
2
/kg
t
c
ts G
GNR
20.166.7 min m
2
/kg
4. Nahar [18] g
MCwM1CuTw2Tw1
CA
_
T
0
Gdt
27.5%
Table 2
Values of variables used in calculations [219].
Variable Value Variable Value
A
c
(BC) 0.492 m
2
C (CC) 8.88
A
c
(CC) 1.545 m
2
M
1
1.477 kg
A
t
0.174 m
2
M
2
4.751 kg
A
g
0.235 m
2
Ta
30 C
C
w
4186 J/kgK T
w2
95 C
C (BC) 2.09
Ta
30 C
G
T
906 W/m
2
COR
g
0
C
U
L
12
where g
0
is the optical efciency, C is the concentration ratio and U
L
is the heat loss factor. The experimental data which is illustrated in
Table 2 has been tted in HWB equation to determine the relevant
parameters. In Table 2 M
1
, M
2
, T
a
, T
w2
, A
c
, A
t
, A
g
, C
w
, C and G
T
refer to
mass of water for BC, mass of water for CC, average ambient tem-
perature, nal temperature of water, aperture area, pot surface area
for CC, glazed surface area for BC, specic heat capacity of water,
concentration ratio for CC and average total solar radiation on the
plane of aperture, respectively. Rise in water temperature (T
w
) with
time (t) is given in Fig. 14. Calculated parameters in the study are
listed in Table 3. In Table 3 F, U
L
and T
fx
refer to heat exchange
efciency factor, heat loss factor and maximum achievable uid
temperature, respectively. The results indicated that COR is a robust
performance parameter derived from HWB equation analytically. A
cooker with a higher value of COR may be graded higher than the
one having a lower value of COR.
Al-Soud et al. [117] constructed, operated and analyzed a para-
bolic cooker with automatic two axes sun tracking system as illus-
trated in Fig. 15. The experiments were performed for three days
from 8:30 h to 16:30 h in the year 2008. The test results indicated
that the water temperature inside the cookers tube reached 90 C
when the maximum registered ambient temperature was 36 C. It
was also noticed that the water temperature increases when the
ambient temperature gets higher or when the solar intensity is
abundant. This is in favour of utilizing the proposed cooker in
many developing countries, which are characterized by high solar
insulations and high temperatures. Besides cooking, the aforemen-
tioned cooker could be utilized for warming food, drinks as well as
to pasteurize water or milk.
5.3. Numerical models of solar cookers
El-Sebaii [172] numerically analyzed a box-type solar cooker
with outer-inner reectors. Numerical calculations were carried
out for different tilt angles of the outer reector on a typical winter
day (20 January) in Tanta, Egypt. The optimum tilt angle of the
outer reector was 60. For this specic value, it was observed that
the specic and characteristic boiling times were decreased by 50%
and 35%, respectively, compared to the case without the outer
reector. The overall utilization efciency of the cooker was deter-
mined to be 31%. Terres et al. [173] numerically investigated the
heating of bee honey, olive oil, milk and water in a solar box cooker
integrated with internal reectors. In the study, climatic values of
Mexico City for February 26, 2006 were used. It was observed that
the maximum simulation temperatures were 91.8, 91.6, 86.2 and
85.3 C that correspond to bee honey, olive oil, milk and water,
respectively. Olwi and Khalifa [174] presented an elaborate analy-
sis on a solar cooker used for meat grilling. Several experiments
were performed in order determine the effects of thermal param-
eters on cooking performance. In addition, a mathematical model
was developed. Heat balance equations were solved via 4th order
RungeKutta method. It was observed that an air-tight solar cooker
with double glazing and maximum meat charge provide the best
performance and highest efciency for the solar grill. Similarly to
Olwi and Khalifa [174], Bidotnark and Turkmen [175] used 4th or-
der RungeKutta method to investigate thermal performance of a
hot box solar cooker named ITU-2 which was manufactured in
Istanbul Technical University, Turkey. Jubran and Alsaad [176] pre-
sented the theoretical analysis and performance investigation of a
single, as well as double, glazed box-type solar cooker with or
without reectors. The mathematical model was based on heat
balance equations arranged for various components of the cooker.
In the study, the properties of the cooking materials and the overall
heat loss coefcient were allowed to vary as a function of the
absorber plate and food temperature. Effects of thermal parame-
ters on cooking performance were investigated.
5.4. Modeling and simulation
In North West University, Mawire et al. [177] carried out dis-
charging simulations for an oil/pebble-bed thermal energy storage
system (TES). Accuracy of the model was veried by the experi-
mental results. Discharging results of the TES system were pre-
sented using two different methods. The rst method discharged
the TES system at a constant ow rate while the second method
changed the ow rate in order to provide a desired power at a con-
stant load inlet temperature. It was observed from the results that
the TES system at a constant ow rate demonstrate a higher rate
heat utilization. However, this is not benecial to the cooking pro-
cess since the maximum cooking temperature is not maintained
for the duration of the discharging period. On the other hand, the
controlled load power discharging method has a slower initial rate
of heat utilization but the maximum cooking temperature is
Fig. 14. Rise in water temperature with time for BC and CC [219].
Table 3
Mean values of parameter set with COR, experimental variables and maximum
achievable uid temperature [219].
Parameters BC CC
Mean Std. deviation Mean Std. deviation
FU
L
/C (W/m
2
K) 1.576 0.138 2.260 0.011
Fg
0
0.213 0.008 0.348 0.013
COR 0.136 0.011 0.155 0.007
T
fx
(C) 147.75 4.950 161.82 16.688
maintained for most of the discharging process and this is what is
expected for the cooking process. Mawire and McPherson [178]
simulated the temperature distribution of an oil-pebble bed TES
system under a variable heat source during charging. The charging
outlet temperature was controlled by a combined feedforward and
PID feedback control structure to maintain thermal stratication
during the experiment and the simulations. In the study, Schu-
mann model and modied Schumann model were simulated in
order to analyse thermodynamic behaviour of the TES system. It
was found that the discharging results were in good agreement
with the experimental results. Thulasi Das et al. [70,71] presented
thermal models for the solar box cookers augmented with different
number of cooking vessels. The effect of parameters such as the
thickness and size of the absorber plate, emissivity of the vessel,
insulation thickness, and cooking time were studied. Different
cooker sizes were simulated in order to assess their adequacy in
cooking. It was found that the black paint on the vessels could be
avoided if weathered stainless steel or aluminium vessels are used.
In addition, the cooker with inner dimensions of 0.6 0.6 0.1 m
3
was found to be adequate to cook lunch and dinner on a clear day
even in the winter months. Besides these specic studies, some
researchers focused on solar energy models in recent years [179
182]. Jebaraj and Iniyan [183] presented a review on energy mod-
els including renewable energy models.
5.5. Experimental work
Purohit [184] carried out a large number of experiments on a
box-type solar cooker in the climatic conditions of New Delhi, In-
dia. He determined absorber tray temperature (T
ps
), ambient tem-
perature (T
as
) and illumination intensity (H
s
) in order to determine
rst gure of merit (F
1
). Similarly, he measured initial water tem-
perature (T
w1
), nal water temperature (T
w2
), average ambient
temperature T
a
, average illumination intensity (H
) and time
difference in which water temperature rises from T
w1
to T
w2
to
be able to calculate second gure of merit (F
2
). The measured
and calculated parameters are listed in Tables 4 and 5. In Indian
Institute of Technology, Kumar [185] presented a simple test
procedure for determination of design parameters to predict the
thermal performance of a solar box cooker. In order to determine
two gures of merit (F
1
and F
2
), a series of outdoor experiments
were conducted on double glazed solar cooker with aperture area
of 0.245 m
2
. Experimental setup for determination of F
1
and F
2
is
illustrated in Fig. 16. The parameters required, optical efciency
and heat capacity of the cooker were calculated using the linear
regression analysis of experimental F
2
data for different load of
water. The results indicated that optical efciency and heat capac-
ity of the cooker are crucial design parameters to be able to predict
the thermal performance of solar cookers. Kumar et al. [186,187]
experimentally investigated the heat loss from a parabolic concen-
trator solar cooker with and without wind condition. Values of the
heat loss factor for the tilted reector were compared with those
obtained with the reector in a horizontal position. It was found
that a parabolic reector is not required for heat loss determina-
tion. It was also noted that thermal performance of a parabolic
concentrator solar cooker depends greatly on the wind speed. In
Taiwan, Yeh et al. [188] experimentally and analytically investi-
gated a novel design for inserting an absorbing plate to divide
the air duct into two channels (the upper and the lower) for dou-
ble-ow operation in solar air heaters with ns attached over
and under the absorbing plate. Both the theoretical predictions
and experimental results indicated that the optimal fraction of air-
ow rate in upper and lower subchannels is around the value of
0.5. They also examined the effect of the ow-rate ratio of the
two air streams of owing over and under the absorbing plate on
the enhancement of collector efciency. It was underlined that
providing ns attached on the collector, will improve the collector
efciency. Moreover, constructing the collector with ns attached
may scarcely increase the fan power. Rathore and Shukla [189]
experimentally analyzed two different solar cookers: at plate
box type solar cooker (SBC) and parabolic solar cooker (SPC). The
experiments were carried out at the roof top of Renewable Energy
Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Technol-
ogy, Banaras Hindu University (BHU), Varanasi, India during month
of October and November 2008. The cookers were operated under
the same climatic conditions. It was found that the daily average
Fig. 15. Schematic of the two axes sun tracking system [117].
temperature of water in the SPC was 333 K and for SBC was 326 K
and the daily average difference between the temperature of water
in the cooking vessel and the ambient air temperature was 31.6 K
for SPC and 26.4 K for SBC. The energy output of the SPC varied
from 0.65 to 39.3 W and 7.44 to 33.49 W for SBC, whereas its exer-
gy output was in the range of 0.92 to 2.58 W for SPC and for SBC it
varied from 0.65 to 1.45 W. The energy efciency of the SPC varied
from 0.42% to 5.27% and for the SBC it varies from 4.7% to 29.81%.
Prasanna and Umanand [154] developed a hybrid solar cooking
system as shown in Fig. 17 where the solar energy was transported
to the kitchen. The thermal energy source was used to supplement
the Liqueed Petroleum Gas (LPG) which was in common use in
kitchens. In the prescribed system, cooking could be carried out
at any time of the day with time taken being comparable to con-
ventional systems. Design and sizing of different components of
the system were described with equations.
5.6. Effective parameters on performance of solar cookers
It is well known in literature that thermal performance param-
eters of solar cookers are highly dependent on the main compo-
nents of the cookers. If a solar box cooker is considered, these
components will be the booster mirror, glazing, absorber tray,
cooking vessel, heat storage material and insulation as expected.
On the other hand, characteristic features of the reective surfaces
will play the main role if a solar panel cooker or a parabolic cooker
is evaluated.
5.6.1. Booster mirror
A booster mirror is quite signicant for a solar cooker since it
allows higher illumination intensity falling on the transmitting
surface of the cooker hence higher working temperatures which
enhance the efciency. Ibrahim and Elreidy [190] investigated
the performance of a solar cooker integrated with a plane booster
mirror reector under the climatic conditions of Egypt. The exper-
iments lasted 2 years for various operating conditions. Cooker
position and the tilt angle of the booster mirror were adjusted in
order to maximize the sunlight concentration. It was observed that
a good meal for a family of four was cooked in 34 h. It was also
found that better heat transfer occurred when the cooking pot
Table 4
First gure of merit (F
1
) of a typical Indian solar box cooker obtained from outdoor
testing [184].
T
ps
(C) T
as
(C) H
s
(W/m
2
) F
1
106.84 26.33 603 0.1335
111.05 27.05 630 0.1333
105.66 26.33 603 0.1316
118.44 28.81 687 0.1316
117.52 28.81 687 0.1302
104.71 26.33 603 0.1299
106.52 24.64 631 0.1298
118.78 29.71 687 0.1296
118.67 29.71 687 0.1294
108.39 27.05 630 0.1291
112.61 28.65 651 0.1289
112.21 26.76 663 0.1288
107.97 27.05 630 0.1284
111.88 26.76 663 0.1284
102.54 23.14 619 0.1283
105.59 24.64 631 0.1282
111.42 26.76 663 0.1276
111.56 28.65 651 0.1274
111.29 28.65 651 0.1269
125.35 31.84 737 0.1268
104.04 24.64 631 0.1258
101.52 23.14 619 0.1258
122.01 29.16 742 0.1251
105.23 27.05 630 0.1248
100.58 23.14 619 0.1243
Average value of F
1
0.1285
Standard deviation 0.0024
Standard error of mean 0.0005
Table 5
Second gure of merit (F
2
) of a typical Indian solar box cooker obtained from outdoor
testing [184].
T
w1
(C) T
w2
(C) T
a
(C) H
(W/m
2
) T (s) F
2
60.00 90.00 38.05 712 5100 0.4997
60.10 90.27 32.00 798 5520 0.4985
60.00 90.00 38.03 692 5640 0.4864
60.00 90.00 38.30 696 5340 0.4852
60.34 90.03 28.09 803 6120 0.4838
60.59 90.03 22.62 885 5580 0.4829
60.00 90.00 36.90 764 4740 0.4792
60.00 90.00 38.00 712 5220 0.4789
60.00 90.00 38.18 655 6120 0.4787
60.00 90.00 36.74 631 6900 0.4787
60.10 90.03 25.23 865 5640 0.4780
60.00 90.00 35.55 631 7200 0.4752
60.00 90.00 34.59 731 5400 0.4749
60.00 90.00 36.90 764 4740 0.4747
60.00 90.00 35.58 728 5340 0.4732
60.02 90.29 37.27 819 4500 0.4721
61.37 91.54 35.95 767 5100 0.4667
60.83 90.03 30.17 738 7320 0.4665
60.59 90.03 30.95 842 5280 0.4652
60.00 90.00 35.45 631 7500 0.4649
60.00 90.00 37.70 676 6060 0.4647
60.39 90.76 37.31 767 5100 0.4618
60.39 90.79 35.59 890 4200 0.4577
60.59 90.27 32.16 809 5760 0.4572
60.10 90.03 28.19 800 6600 0.4543
Average value of F
2
0.4744
Standard deviation 0.0117
Standard error of mean 0.0023
Fig. 16. Experimental setup for determination of (a) F
1
and (b) F
2
[185].
was covered with an airtight plastic transparent cover rather than
using an ordinary metallic cover. Gayapershad et al. [191] evalu-
ated the performances of two solar cooking units: a low-cost,
low-technology Sunstove unit and the more expensive Ishisa box
unit. The cookers were tested with and without tracking system
under summer radiometric conditions at the Solar Thermal Appli-
cations Research Laboratory (STARlab) between December 2005
and April 2006. The Ishisa box unit also augmented with external
mirror panels. The Sunstove unit could not succeed to boil water.
The maximum water temperature reached in the Sunstove unit
was found to be 88 C for tracked conditions. On the other hand,
the Ishisa box unit enabled boiling water for both tracked and
non-tracked conditions. The tracked unit reached the boiling tem-
perature 20 min earlier than the untracked unit. It was noted that
the Ishisa box unit benetted from tracking efciently via its exter-
nal booster mirrors. In Indian Institute of Technology, Shukla and
Gupta [192] presented an energy and exergy analysis of a concen-
trating solar cooker. The cooker was devised for community cook-
ing and integrated with a linear parabolic concentrator which
concentration ratio is 20. The experiments were carried out in both
summer and winter conditions. Through the experimental results,
the average efciency of the solar cooker was determined to be
14%. Heat losses caused low efciency were classied as optical
losses (16%), geometrical losses (30%) and thermal losses (35%).
The rest of the losses were due to edge losses, etc. The maximum
temperature that the water in the cooker reached was 98 C during
the tests.
5.6.2. Glazing
Barker [193] interestingly showed that, if it is not needed to ex-
ceed 100 C, an efcient solar cooker can be made for less than 5$
with materials that are available almost everywhere. He under-
lined that multiple glazings and highly insulated boxes are not
necessary in the proposed design. A double glazed transparent
polyethylene plastic lm was used as a glazing material in the coo-
ker. It was concluded that most of the foods can be cooked in this
very low cost cooker with a 0.25 m
2
collector area. Bell mentioned
about the glazing selection for various heat transfer applications.
One or more sheets of glass or other diathermanous (radiation-
transmitting) material was utilized in order to transfer the solar
energy to the collector/absorber plate. The transparent cover was
used to minimize convection losses from the absorber plate
through the restraint of the stagnant air layer between the absor-
ber plate and the glass. It also enabled reducing radiation losses
from the collector as the glass is transparent to the short wave
radiation received by the sun but it is nearly opaque to long-wave
thermal radiation emitted by the absorber plate [20,194,195].
Hussain and Khan [196] experimentally investigated a low cost
box-type solar cooker made of two paper carton boxes with crum-
pled newspaper balls as insulation. The cooker was supported by a
reector covered with aluminium foil. Experimental results ob-
tained from the novel cooker were compared with a standard cost-
lier solar box cooker. It was observed that the water temperature
rapidly increase in novel cooker compared to the standard cooker.
Two gures of merit of the new cooker also found satisfactory.
5.6.3. Absorber plate
Absorber tray of a solar cooker is a crucial component since it
absorbs the useful energy from sun to be able to succeed cooking
process. Geometric structure of an absorber plate is quite signi-
cant as well as its thermophysical properties. In order to maximize
the illumination intensity falling on the absorber tray and enhance
the heat transfer from the absorber tray to the food in cooking
vessels, absorber tray is a key item which allows various modica-
tions. Harmim et al. [67] devised and constructed a box-type solar
cooker with a nned absorber plate to maximize the solar energy
absorption. The results showed that solar box cooker integrated
with ns was approximately 7% more efcient than the conven-
tional solar box cooker. The time required for water to boil was
reduced approximately 12% when a nned absorber plate was uti-
lized. In Turkey, Ozkaymak [197] experimentally investigated the
performance of a hot box solar cooker. The cooker has a cylindrical
geometry as shown in Fig. 18, with a 38 cm inner diameter, 40 cm
outer diameter and 25 cm height. The outer wall of the cooker was
made of 1 mm thick metal sheet tray. The absorber plate was made
of thin copper sheet, which was painted black for absorbing solar
radiation better. Glass wool insulation was used on the bottom
and sides of the cooker to minimize thermal losses through con-
duction. A clear window glass of 4 mm thickness was xed over
the inner tray. Three 4 mm thick plane mirror reectors were
placed around the cooker. The three reectors were kept xed.
The constant tilt of the reector is 678 from the horizontal plane.
The cooking pot was a black painted aluminium pot with 10 cm
diameter and 16.5 cm height. The experiments were carried out
during July and August 2004 at Karabuk, Turkey. The solar cooker
with three reectors was exposed to solar radiation between
10.00 a.m. and 4 p.m. It was observed from the experimental
results that absorber plate temperature was over 100 C during a
period of 5 h which is a sufcient time to cook most of the foods.
Mawire et al. [198] developed a thermal energy storage system
using a packed pebble bed. An electrical hot plate heated up oil
circulating in a copper absorber plate which charges the storage
system. A Visual Basic program was developed to acquire data
for monitoring the storage system and to maintain a nearly con-
stant outlet temperature from the charging point. It was concluded
Fig. 17. Block diagram of the hybrid solar cooking system [154].
that the results obtained can be used to characterize the cooking
system.
5.6.4. Cooking equipment
Cooking pots are the items which are in conduction with the ab-
sorber tray in order to receive the absorbed energy and transfer it
to the food. Any type of cooking vessel can be used in solar cookers
but generally rectangular and cylindrical shaped cooking vessels
made of aluminium or copper are recommended. Saxena et al.
[20] emphasized in their comprehensive review that number of
cooking pots in a solar box cooker may vary depending on the
quantity and the type of the food. Gaur et al. [79] found that per-
formance of a solar cooker can be enhanced if a cooking vessel with
a concave shape lid is used instead of a plain lid. Joshi et al.
[199,200] presented experimental and numerical studies on solar
cookers in the early 2012 in order to provide an efcient design
including cooking equipment. They aimed at increasing the solar
cooking efciency from 1025% to 60% or more. In their novel de-
sign, the cooking pots gained energy from condensing steam on the
outside surface. The cooking charge (water + rice or lentils and/or
vegetables) received heat by the mode of natural convection. The
results of CFD indicated that optimum heat ux is in the range of
16,20025,000 kcal/h m
2
where m
2
is the bottom surface area of
the cooking system. Cooking pots with perforations were recom-
mended for higher efciency. Franco et al. [201] introduced a mul-
tiple use communal solar cooker. The parabolic concentrator and
the cooking pot are shown in Fig. 19. The cooking pot with 10 L
capacity was painted black and placed on the focus of the concen-
trator. Stew as food was tested in the cooking system. A stew is
generally made with potatoes, noodles or rice, meat, vegetables
like peppers and carrots, and spices. The cooking is done in water,
adding the ingredients according to the time span each one needs
to be cooked. It was expressed in the study that about 18 kg of food
can be cooked using only one concentrator. They noted that about
18 kg of stew can be cooked on each solar cooker within 3 or 4 h.
5.6.5. Heat storage material
It is a clear fact from the literature that solar cookers are very
promising devices in the upcoming future. However, there are
some handicaps concerning the solar cooking technology. Perhaps,
the most challenging point of solar cookers is that they are not able
to serve when the sun goes down. Some researchers performed
intensive efforts on solar box cookers in order to allow late evening
cooking. PCMs were considered as a solution in most cases.
Bushnell [202] designed, constructed and evaluated a solar energy
storing heat exchanger as a step toward a solar cooking concept.
The solidsolid transition of pentaerythritol was the principal
mechanism for energy storage. The methods for describing the
system performance were explained and applied to a test system
containing a controllable replacement for the solar input power.
This rst stage of this research work followed by a heat exchanger,
which was connected to a concentrating array of CPC cylindrical
troughs. Author also described the size of the solar collector area
and mass of PCM mass needed in order to provide adequate energy
for several family-size meals with sufcient storage to cook at
night and 1 or 2 days later. The performance was described from
efciency measurements and the determination of a gure of mer-
it. Bushnell and Sohi [203] also designed a modular phase change
heat exchanger with pentaerythritol used as a PCM for thermal
storage (solidsolid phase change at 182 C) was tested in an oven
by circulating heat transfer oil which was heated electrically in a
manner to simulate a concentrating solar collector. Thermal energy
retention times and cooking extraction times were determined,
and along with the efciencies, were compared with the results
previously reported for a non-modular heat exchanger. Buddhi
and Sahoo [204] designed a box-type solar cooker as shown in
Fig. 20 with latent heat storage for the composite climatic condi-
tions of India. The experimental results demonstrated the feasibil-
ity of using a phase change material as the storage medium in solar
cookers. It also provided a nearly constant plate temperature in the
Fig. 18. Hot box solar cooker with cylindrical cooking vessel and experimental
setup [197].
Fig. 19. (a) Communal solar cooker and (b) cooking pot [201].
late evening. The experimental results were also compared with
those of a conventional solar cooker. The test of the cooker was
performed without a cooking load. The results indicated that solar
cooker with PCM provides an environment in which the cooking is
possible even the sun goes away. The absorber plate temperature
of the solar cooker remained constant at about 70 C for a long
period of time.
5.6.6. Insulation
It is well-documented in literature that insulation is one of most
crucial key points for a box type solar cooker to be able to provide
an efcient cooking [103,104]. All materials with low thermal con-
ductivity may be used as an insulation material in solar cookers.
However, the main purpose for material selection should be mini-
mizing heat loss from the solar cooker to the environment with
minimal cost. Vandana [205] devised and constructed a very low
cost for Indian women who are burdened with household work,
agriculture work and care of animals in addition to all time nan-
cial crisis. The proposed reless cooker was insulated with straw-
board and tested in terms of cooking efciency. The results
indicated that the reless cooker of strawboard could both cook
as well as keep the food hot with in safe temperatures well above
6 h. Nyahoro et al. [206] presented an explicit nite-difference
method to simulate the thermal performance of short-term ther-
mal storage for a focusing, indoor, institutional, solar cooker. The
cooker storage unit consisted of a cylindrical solid block. The block
was enclosed in a uniform layer of insulation except where there
were cavities on the top and bottom surfaces to allow heating of
a pot from storage and heating of the storage by solar radiation.
A paraboloidal concentrator focused solar radiation through a sec-
ondary reector onto a central circular zone of the storage block
through the cavity in the insulation. The storage was charged for
a set period of time and heat was subsequently discharged to a
pot of water. In these simulations a pot of cold water was placed
on the hot storage block and the time then estimated until the
water either boiled or the temperature of the water reached a max-
imum value. Simulations were made for a given pot capacity with
the storage block made from either cast iron or granite (rock). The
effects on cooker performance were compared for a variety of
height to diameter ratios of the storage block and size of the area
of solar input zone. Bollin [207] proposed a detailed study about
the transparent insulation in various solar applications including
solar cookers with thermal energy storage.
6. Thermodynamic assessment of solar cookers
Energy and exergy analysis provide an alternative means of
evaluating and comparing solar cookers. Ozturk [115] dened
energy and exergy efciency for the solar cookers as given in
Eqs. (13) and (14), respectively. Several studies were carried out
about this topic. However, the rst study on energy and exergy
efciencies of solar cookers was conducted by Ozturk [115]. It
was stressed in his article that there was large difference in energy
and exergy output and efciency because of changes in cooker con-
guration. It was also seen that the exergy analysis was more
convenient than the energy analysis for predicting solar cooker
efciency.
g
energy output
energy input

E
o
E
i
m
w
c
pw
T
wf
T
wi
_
=t
I
t
A
sc
13
where g is energy efciency, m
w
is water mass, c
pw
is specic heat of
water, T
wf
is nal temperature of water, T
wi
is initial temperature of
water, t is time, I
t
is total instantaneous solar radiation and A
sc
is
intercept area of solar cooker.
w
exergy output
exergy input

Ex
o
Ex
i
m
w
c
pw
T
wf
T
wi
T
o
ln
T
wf
T
wi
_ _
=t
I
t
1
4Ta
3Ts
_ _
A
sc
14
where w is exergy efciency, T
o
is outside temperature, T
a
is ambi-
ent temperature and T
s
is sun temperature. Kumar et al. [208] inves-
tigated a truncated pyramid type solar box cooker (TPSBC) in terms
of exergy and energy efciencies. Two cooking vessels which lled
2 L of water were used for conducting full load test. During the test
period, the booster mirror was covered with black cloth. The water
temperature inside the vessels reached 90.6 C from 60 C in 70 min
whereas the initial water and ambient temperatures were 43.18 C
and 33.43 C, respectively. The maximum and minimum values of
insulation were observed as 929 W/m
2
and 376 W/m
2
, respectively.
The maximum and minimum energy gained from water inside the
solar cooker was calculated 20.8 kJ and 7.5 kJ, respectively. An inter-
esting result in the article was the shift in the output exergy peak
from that of the output energy peak on the time scale, which is a
direct consequence of the decrease in the exergy lost after the water
temperature became >60 C. In addition exergy analysis of solar box
cookers was a practical, comprehensive and realistic tool for solar
cookers performance evaluation. The schematic view of TPSBC is
illustrated in Fig. 21.
It is necessary to determine the exergy of incoming solar radia-
tion for conducting second law analysis of solar cookers. In this
context, Petela [118] dened an expression for the utilizable part
of the solar energy as follows:
w 1
1
3
T
0
T
_ _
4
4
3
T
0
T
15
where w is maximum efciency ratio, T
0
is ambient temperature
and T is absolute temperature. It is understood from the Eq. (15)
that for T
0
= 300 K and T = 6000 K, approximately 0.93 G is the util-
izable part of the incoming energy where G is the illumination
intensity.
Fig. 20. Solar box cooker with thermal energy storage material (G: double glass lid,
A: absorber tray, B: PCM tray, C: pot container, P: PCM and I: glasswool insulation)
[204].
Fig. 21. Schematic model of TPSBC with cooking vessels [208].
7. Methods to enhance solar cooking performance
There are many opportunities in order to improve the perfor-
mance of solar cookers. First of all, amount of absorbed solar en-
ergy may be increased via a concentrating system. Fresnel lens is
a good choice to achieve this purpose. Especially in recent years,
many applications of Fresnel lens have been recorded in not only
solar cookers but also other solar energy technologies [209214].
However, if a photovoltaic cell is considered, when the PV cell is
supported with a Fresnel lens it denitely should be cooled by an
efcient cooling system for a desired increment in power output.
Otherwise, as reported by Wu et al. [215] efciency of the cell dra-
matically decreases depending on the huge temperature increase
of the cell. Amount of solar energy falling on the surface of a solar
cooker can also be enhanced with reecting mirrors or surfaces.
Secondly, thermophysical properties of the absorber tray play an
important role on the performance parameters of solar box cook-
ers. Absorber trays should be selected from materials with high
thermal conductivity and painted black. It is also possible to devel-
op new materials with higher absorptivity coefcients. As recom-
mended by Harmim et al. [67], absorber plate can be constructed
with extended surfaces in order to enhance the heat transfer from
absorber tray to food in the cooking vessels. Saxena et al. [20] re-
ported a cooking vessel modied to reduce the cooking time for
a solar box cooker. The cooking vessel had a trapezoidal shape
which absorbs a good amount of solar radiation due to its exposed
surface area and made of aluminium with a 150 mm bottom end
diameter and 180 mm top end diameter. A series of lugs in a
curvature form at the bottom of vessel was provided as shown in
Fig. 22 to enhance the heat transfer. The lid became hot and gener-
ated a current of hot air, which circulated inside the box cooker.
The heat carrying by this hot air circulation, reached to the food
via the most sides of the vessel. A heat transfer between food
and the lid took place by means of convection in the air layer be-
tween the food and the lid. The air convection was effective in
transferring heat from the food to the lid and vice versa. The total
depth of the cooking vessel was 600 mm + 40 mm. The radius of
curvature of a lug was 2.5 mm. To measure the temperature of
cooking uid stored in the modied cooking vessel during the test-
ing a lid holder openable knob (screw threaded) was provided on
the top of cooking vessel. There was also a locking system of lid
to the cooking vessel for proper closing. The testing was performed
to determine the cooking power. Thirdly, an efcient and low cost
insulation should be provided in order to avoid heat loss from the
walls of the cooker to the ambient. Transparent insulation materi-
als (TIMs) are highly recommended by many researchers for the
insulation of glazing [105,106]. Finally, solar cookers should be
used with thermal energy storage materials (water, rock, pebble,
PCMs, etc.) to enable late evening cooking.
8. Environmental impacts of solar cookers
Nandwani [216] carried out a study on the ecological benets of
solar cookers. The study aimed at estimating the energy used for
cooking in Costa Rica and comparing advantages and limitations
of solar ovens with conventional rewood and electric stoves.
The payback period of a common hot box type solar oven, even if
used 68 months a year, was found to be around 1214 months.
Even if only 5% of persons facing fuel shortages in the year 2005
use solar ovens, roughly 16.8 million tons of rewood will be saved
and the emission of 38.4 million tons of carbon dioxide per year
will be prevented according to the results. Escobar [217] proposed
a low cost solar cooker which was designed and developed at the
School of Physics seeking to reduce the consumption of wood as
an energy source. According to National statistics, this source of
energy represents 53% of the primary energy consumed in the
country. The solar cookers were made with cardboard, glass,
aluminium foil iron sheet, and vegetable residues as thermal insu-
lator, other insulators were polyurethane residue which testing has
determined its thermal resistance. The economics savings by using
the prescribed cooker in terms of wood burning and electricity
were properly highlighted. Wentzel and Pouris [14] investigated
the development impact of solar cookers in South Africa. Their
observations were based on eld tests in South Africa that started
in 1996 to investigate the social acceptability of solar cookers and
to facilitate local production and commercialization of the technol-
ogy. It was concluded that only 17% of solar cooker owners do not
use their stoves after purchase. Active solar cooker users utilise
their stoves on average for 31% of their cooking incidences. Solar
cooking technology may be a very good opportunity especially in
rural areas of developing world in order to avoid deforestation.
Solar cookers are quite attractive to deal with the health problems
in developing countries caused by rewood use and minimize the
CO
2
emission all over the world.
Fig. 22. A modied cooking pot for solar box cookers [20].
9. Future potential of solar cookers
As reported by Panwar et al. [4], renewable energy resources
will play an important role in the worlds future. According to
the global renewable energy scenario, proportion of the solar ther-
mal applications will be about 480 million tons oil equivalent by
2040 [218]. Average cost of solar cookers decreases day by day
on the contrary their power output and efciency considerably
increases. In the upcoming future, widespread use of this technol-
ogy is expected hopefully not only in developing countries but also
throughout the world. Nowadays, solar cookers are also available
to use in the areas with limited solar radiation depending on the
developments in solar power concentrating systems and material
technology. In addition, the most challenging point of solar cook-
ers, unavailable to use when sun goes away, is overcome with ther-
mal energy storage techniques. Briey, it is anticipated that solar
cooking technology will be demanded by a huge group of people
in the near future because of its outstanding features.
10. Conclusion
In this study, a comprehensive review of the available literature
on solar cookers is presented. The review covers a historic over-
view of solar cooking technology, detailed description of various
types of solar cookers, performance analysis and thermodynamic
assessment of solar cookers, novel designs on solar cooking
technology, key items to enhance solar cooking efciency and also
ecological aspects of solar cookers. Specic ndings obtained in the
review are given as follows:
Fresnel lenses or at least two booster mirrors should be used in
solar cookers in order to maximize the incoming solar radiation.
Glazing should be double for a satisfactory insulation.
Absorber plate/tray should be painted black and augmented
with extended surfaces for better heat transfer.
Cylindrical shaped cooking vessels made of aluminium or coo-
per and painted black should be preferred for a higher cooking
efciency.
TIMs should be utilized between glazings in order to avoid nota-
ble heat loss from the top of the cooker.
Glasswool, rockwool, strawboard or sawdust can be used for the
insulation of side walls and bottom.
To enable late evening cooking water, rock, pebble, PCMs, etc.
should be utilized as thermal energy storage material beneath
the absorber tray.
Maximum payback period of solar cookers is about 2 years and
this time may be shorter depending on the design, frequency of
use and location.
Solar cooking technology is a key item in order to deal with
deforestation and environmental pollution.
References
[1] Riffat SB, Cuce E. A review on hybrid photovoltaic/thermal collectors and
systems. Int J Low Carbon Technol 2011;6(3):21241.
[2] Sahin AD, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Thermodynamic analysis of solar photovoltaic
cell systems. Solar Energy Mater Solar Cells 2007;91:1539.
[3] Hasan MA, Sumathy K. Photovoltaic thermal module concepts and their
performance analysis: a review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2010;14:184559.
[4] Panwar NL, Kaushik SC, Kothari S. Role of renewable energy sources in
environmental protection: a review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2011;15:
151324.
[5] Cuce E, Bali T. Variation of cell parameters of a pSi PV cell with different solar
irradiances and cell temperatures in humid climates. In: Fourth international
exergy, energy and environment symposium, Sharjah, UAE; 1923 April 2009.
[6] Cuce E, Bali T. A comparison of energy and power conversion efciencies of
mSi and pSi PV cells in Trabzon. In: Fifth international advanced
technologies symposium, Karabuk, Turkey; 1315 May 2009.
[7] Cuce E, Bali T. Improving performance parameters of silicon solar cells using
air cooling. In: Fifth international edge energy symposium and exhibition,
Denizli, Turkey; 2730 June 2010.
[8] Cuce E, Bali T, Sekucoglu SA. Effects of passive cooling on performance of
silicon photovoltaic cells. Int J Low Carbon Technol 2011;6(4):299308.
[9] Cuce PM, Cuce E. A novel model of photovoltaic modules for parameter
estimation and thermodynamic assessment. Int J Low Carbon Technol
2012;7(2):15965.
[10] Cuce PM, Cuce E, Aygun C. Homotopy perturbation method for temperature
distribution, n efciency and n effectiveness of convective straight ns. Int
J Low Carbon Technol 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijlct/cts062.
[11] Johansson TB, Kelly H, Reddy AKN, et al. Renewable energy sources for fuels
and electricity. Earthscan Publications Ltd. and Island Press; 1993.
[12] Lahkar PJ, Samdarshi SK. A review of the thermal performance parameters of
box type solar cookers and identication of their correlations. Renew Sust
Energy Rev 2010;14:161521.
[13] Toonen HM. Adapting to an innovation: solar cooking in the urban
households of Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso). Phys Chem Earth
2009;34:6571.
[14] Wentzel M, Pouris A. The development impact of solar cookers: a review of
solar cooking impact research in South Africa. Energy Policy 2007;35:
190919.
[15] Pohekar SD, Kumar D, Ramachandran M. Dissemination of cooking energy
alternatives in India: a review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2005;9:37993.
[16] World Health Organization (WHO). Fuel for life. WHO, Geneva; 2006.
[17] Muthusivagami RM, Velraj R, Sethumadhavan R. Solar cookers with and
without thermal storage: a review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2010;14:691701.
[18] Nahar NM. Performance and testing of a hot box storage solar cooker. Energy
Convers Manage 2003;44:132331.
[19] Halacy B, Halacy C. Cooking with the sun. Lafayette, CA: Jack Howell; 1992.
[20] Saxena A, Varun, Pandey SP, Srivastav G. A thermodynamic review on solar
box type cookers. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2011;15:330118.
[21] Narayanaswamy S. Making the most of sunshine: a handbook of solar energy
for the common man. New Delhi: Sangam Books Ltd.; 2001.
[22] Hoda MM. Solar cookers. Lucknow, India: Appropriate Technology
Development Association; 1979.
[23] Knudson B. State of the art of solar cooking: a global survey of practices and
promotion programs. Sacramento: SCI; 2004.
[24] Mullick SC, Kandpal TC, Saxena AK. Thermal test procedure for box type solar
cooker. Solar Energy 1987;39(4):35360.
[25] Funk PA. Evaluating the international standard procedure for testing solar
cookers and reporting performance. Solar Energy 2000;68(1):17.
[26] Ashok K. A review of solar cooker designs. TIDE; 1998.
[27] Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press; 1995.
[28] Kimambo CZM. Development and performance testing of solar cookers. J
Energy S Afr 2007;18(3).
[29] Kerr B, Scott J. Use of the solar panel cooker for medical pressure steam
sterilization. In: Solar cookers and food processing international conference,
Granada, Spain; 1216 July 2006.
[30] Khan BH. Non-conventional energy resources. Tata McGraw Hill Publications;
2008.
[31] Kothari DP, Singal KC, Ranjan R. Renewable energy resources and emerging
technologies. Prentice-Hall; 2008.
[32] Ghai ML, Bansal TD, Kanl BN. Design of reector type direct solar cooker. J Sci
Ind Res 1953;12A:16575.
[33] Ghai ML. Solar heat for cooking. J Sci Ind Res 1953;12A:11724.
[34] Telkes M. Solar cooking ovens. Princeton, New Jersey: Solar Energy
Laboratory, CurtissWright Corporation; 1955.
[35] Telkes M. Solar cooking ovens. Solar Energy 1959;3(1):110.
[36] Funk PA, Larson DL. Parametric model of solar cooker performance. Solar
Energy 1998;62(1):638.
[37] Schaeffer W. Report on solar cooker. Solar Energy Laboratory, University of
Wisconsin; 1960.
[38] Telkes M, Andrassy S. Practical solar-cooking ovens. In: United Nations
conference on new sources of energy, Rome, Italy; 2131 August 1961.
[39] Dufe JA, Lof GOG, Beckman B. Laboratory and eld studies of plastic reector
solar cookers. Solar Energy 1962;6(8):948.
[40] Lof GOG. Recent investigations in the use of solar energy for cooking. Solar
Energy 1963;7(3):12533.
[41] Ullah Khan E. Practical devices for the utilization of solar energy. Solar Energy
1964;8(1):1722.
[42] Abou-Hussein MSM. Temperature-decay curves in the box-type solar cooker.
In: United Nations Conference on new sources of energy, Rome, Italy; 2131
August 1961.
[43] Garg HP, Mann HS, Thanvi KP. Performance evaluation of ve solar cookers.
Sun: Mankinds Future Source Energy 1978;3:14916.
[44] Garg HP, Prakash J. Solar energy: fundamentals and applications. Tata
McGraw Hill Publications; 2000.
[45] Dang A. Concentrators: a review. Energy Convers Manage 1986;26(1):
1126.
[46] Garg HP, Hrishikesan DS. Enhancement of solar energy on at-plate collector
by plane booster mirrors. Solar Energy 1988;40(4):295307.
[47] Narasimha Rao AV, Sitharama Rao TL, Subramanyam S. Mirror boosters for
solar cookers I. Energy Convers Manage 1988;28(3):2659.
solar cookers II. Energy Convers Manage 1989;29(3):15764.
solar cookers III. Energy Convers Manage 1991;32(1):518.
[50] Narasimha Rao AV, Chalam RV, Subramanyam S, Sitharama Rao TL. Energy
contribution by booster mirrors. Energy Convers Manage 1993;34(4):30926.
[51] El-Sebaii AA, Domanski R, Jaworski M. Experimental and theoretical
investigation of a box-type solar cooker with multi-step inner reectors.
Energy 1994;19(10):101121.
[52] Habeebullah MB, Khalifa AM, Olwi I. The oven receiver: an approach toward
the revival of concentrating solar cookers. Solar Energy 1995;54(4):22737.
[53] El-Sebaii AA, Aboul-Enein S. A box-type solar cooker with one-step outer
reector. Energy 1997;22(5):51524.
[54] Buddhi D, Sharma SD, Sharma A. Thermal performance evaluation of a latent
heat storage unit for late evening cooking in a solar cooker having three
reectors. Energy Convers Manage 2003;44:80917.
[55] Algifri AH, Al-Towaie HA. Efcient orientation impacts of box-type solar
cooker on the cooker performance. Solar Energy 2001;70(2):16570.
[56] Mirdha US, Dhariwal SR. Design optimization of solar cooker. Renew Energy
2008;33:53044.
[57] Jackson RS. Power boosted solar cooker II; 1992.
[58] Eckert ERG, Goldstein RJ, Ibele WE, Patankar SV, Simon TW, Strykowski PJ,
et al. Heat transfer a review of 1993 literature. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
1996;39(5):885963.
[59] Dufe JA, Backman WA. Solar engineering of thermal processes. 3rd ed. New
York: Wiley Publications; 2006.
[60] Deubener J, Helsch G, Moiseev A, Bornhft H. Glasses for solar energy
conversion systems. J Eur Ceram Soc 2009;29:120310.
[61] Mullick SC, Kandpal TC, Kumar S. Top heat-loss factor of double-glazed box-
type solar cooker from indoor experiments. Energy 1997;22(6):55965.
[62] Akhtar N, Mullick SC. Approximate method for computation of glass cover
temperature and top heat-loss coefcient of solar collectors with single
glazing. Solar Energy 1999;66(5):34954.
[63] Kalogirou S. The potential of solar industrial process heat applications. Appl
Energy 2003;76:33761.
[64] Kalogirou SA. Solar thermal collectors and applications. Prog Energy Combust
Sci 2004;30:23195.
[65] Garg HP, Prakash J. Solar energy fundamentals and applications. Tata McGraw
Hill Publications; 2004.
[66] Curlydock. Some experiments on solar oven simulation test. Green man
waiting. Sustainable survival; 2007.
[67] Harmim A, Belhamel M, Boukar M, Amar M. Experimental investigation of a
box-type solar cooker with a nned absorber plate. Energy
2010;35:3799802.
[68] Pande PC, Thanvi KP. Design and development of a solar cooker for maximum
energy capture in stationary mode. Energy Convers Manage 1987;27(1):
11720.
[69] Shrestha VM. Modication of the solar cooker. Solar Wind Technol
1987;4(3):30511.
[70] ThulasiDas TC, Karmakar S, Rao DP. Solar box cooker: part I. Modeling. Solar
Energy 1994;52(3):26572.
[71] ThulasiDas TC, Karmakar S, Rao DP. Solar box cooker: part II. Analysis and
simulation. Solar Energy 1994;52(3):27382.
[72] Anderson T, Duke M, Carson J. Performance of colored solar collectors. In: The
rst international conference on applied energy, Hong Kong; 57 January
2009.
[73] Tripanagnostopoulos Y, Souliotis M, Nousia Th. Solar collectors with colored
absorbers. Solar Energy 2000;68(4):34356.
[74] Kalogirou S, Tripanagnostopoulos Y, Souliotis M. Performance of solar
systems employing collectors with colored absorber. Energy Build
2005;37:82435.
[75] Amer EH. Theoretical and experimental assessment of a double exposure
solar cooker. Energy Convers Manage 2003;44:265163.
[76] Kumar S. Natural convective heat transfer in trapezoidal enclosure of box-
type solar cooker. Renew Energy 2004;29:21122.
[77] Ogunwole OA. Flat plate collector solar cooker. AU J Technol
2006;9(3):199202.
[78] Khalifa AMA, Taha MM, Akyurt M. On prediction of solar cooker performance
and cooking in Pyrex pots. Solar Wind Technol 1986;3(1):139.
[79] Gaur A, Singh OP, Singh SK, Pandey GN. Performance study of solar cooker
with modied utensil. Renew Energy 1999;18:1219.
[80] Narasimha Rao AV, Subramanyam S. Solar cookers part I: cooking vessel on
lugs. Solar Energy 2003;75:1815.
[81] Narasimha Rao AV, Subramanyam S. Solar cookers part II: cooking vessel
with central annular cavity. Solar Energy 2005;78:1922.
[82] Reddy AR, Narasimha Rao AV. Prediction and experimental verication of
performance of box type solar cooker Part I. Cooking vessel with central
cylindrical cavity. Energy Convers Manage 2007;48:203443.
[83] Harmim A, Boukar M, Amar M. Experimental study of a double exposure solar
cooker with nned cooking vessel. Solar Energy 2008;82:2879.
[84] Srinivasan Rao KVN. Innovative solar cooking vessel design. In: Fifth
international energy conversion engineering conference and exhibit. St.
Louis, Missouri, USA; 2527 June 2007.
[85] Abhat A. Low temperature latent heat thermal energy storage: heat storage
materials. Solar Energy 1983;30(4):31332.
[86] Garg HP, Mullick SC, Bhargava AK. Solar thermal energy storage. Dordrecht,
Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company; 1985.
[87] Hasnain SM. Review on sustainable thermal energy storage technologies
Part I: heat storage materials and techniques. Energy Convers Manage
1998;39(11):112738.
[88] Zalba B, Marin JM, Cabeza LF, Mehling H. Review on thermal storage with
phase change: materials, heat transfer analysis and applications. Appl Therm
Eng 2003;23:25183.
[89] Farid MM, Khudhair AM, Siddique AKR, Said AH. A review on phase change
energy storage: materials and applications. Energy Convers Manage
2004;45:1597615.
[90] Sharma SD, Sagara K. Latent heat storage materials and systems: a review. Int
J Green Energy 2005;2:156.
[91] Kenisarin M, Mahkamov K. Solar energy storage using phase change
materials. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2007;11:191365.
[92] Sharma A, Tyagi VV, Chen CR, Buddhi D. Review on thermal energy storage
with phase change materials and applications. Renew Sust Energy Rev
2009;13:31845.
[93] Ramadan MRI, Aboul-Enein S, El-Sebaii AA. A model of an improved low cost-
indoor-solar-cooker in Tanta. Solar Wind Technol 1988;5(4):38793.
[94] Haraksingh I, McDoom IA, Headley OSC. A natural convection at-plate
collector solar cooker with short term storage. Renew Energy 1996;9:72932.
[95] Nandwani SS, Steinhart J, Henning HM, Rommel M, Wittwer V. Experimental
study of multipurpose solar hot box at Freiburg, Germany. Renew Energy
1997;12(1):120.
[96] Sharma SD, Iwata T, Kitano H, Sagara K. Thermal performance of a solar
cooker based on an evacuated tube solar collector with a PCM storage unit.
Solar Energy 2005;78:41626.
[97] Hussein HMS, El-Ghetany HH, Nada SA. Experimental investigation of novel
indirect solar cooker with indoor PCM thermal storage and cooking unit.
Energy Convers Manage 2008;49:223746.
[98] Chen CR, Sharma A, Tyagi SK, Buddhi D. Numerical heat transfer studies of
PCMs used in a box-type solar cooker. Renew Energy 2008;33:11219.
[99] El-Sebaii AA, Al-Amir S, Al-Marzouki FM, Faidah Adel S, Al-Ghamdi AA, Al-
Heniti S. Fast thermal cycling of acetanilide and magnesium chloride
hexahydrate for indoor solar cooking. Energy Convers Manage
2009;50(12):310411.
[100] Oturanc G, Ozbalta N, Gungor A. Performance analysis of a solar cooker in
Turkey. Int J Energy Res 2002;26:10511.
[101] Mawire A, McPherson M. A feedforward IMC structure for controlling the
charging temperature of a TES system of a solar cooker. Energy Convers
Manage 2008;49:314354.
[102] Mawire A, McPherson M, van den Heetkamp RRJ. Simulated energy and
exergy analyses of the charging of an oil-pebble bed thermal energy storage
system for a solar cooker. Solar Energy Mater Solar Cells 2008;92:166876.
[103] Bokhoven T, Cotton N, Druck H, Pilgaard O, Stryi-Hipp G, Weiss W, et al. Solar
thermal vision 2030. European Solar Thermal Technology Platform (ESTTP);
2006.
[104] Kutz M. Mechanical engineers handbook, energy and power. 3rd ed. Wiley
Publications; 2005.
[105] Nahar NM, Marshall RH, Brinkworth BJ. Studies on a hot box solar cooker
with transparent insulation materials. Energy Convers Manage
1994;35(9):78791.
[106] Nahar NM. Design, development and testing of a double reector hot box
solar cooker with a transparent insulation material. Renew Energy
2001;23:16779.
[107] Mishra RS, Jai Sabberwal Prakash SP. Evaluation of solar cooker thermal
performance using different insulating materials. Int J Energy Res
1984;8(4):3936.
[108] Bjork F, Enochsson T. Properties of thermal insulation materials during
extreme environment changes. Constr Build Mater 2009;23:218995.
[109] Nyahoro PK, Johnson RR, Edwards J. Simulated performance of thermal
storage in a solar cooker. Solar Energy 1997;59:117.
[110] Ghai ML. Design of reector type direct solar cookers. J Sci Ind Res
1953;12A:16575.
[111] Lof GOG, Fester D. Design and performance of folding umbrella-type solar
cooker. Proc UN Conf New Sources Energy 1961;5:34752.
[112] Ozturk HH. Second law analysis for solar cookers. Int J Green Energy
2004;1(2):22739.
[113] Ozturk HH, Oztekin S, Bascetincelik A. Evaluation of efciency for solar
cooker using energy and exergy analyses. Int J Energy 2003.
[114] Ozturk HH. Experimental determination of energy and exergy efciency of
the solar parabolic-cooker. Solar Energy 2004;77(1):6771.
[115] Ozturk HH. Comparison of energy and exergy efciency for solar box and
parabolic cookers. J Energy Eng 2007;133(1):5362.
[116] Arenas JM. Design, development and testing of a portable parabolic solar
kitchen. Renew Energy 2007;32:25766.
[117] Al-Soud MS, Abdallah E, Akayleh A, Abdallah S, Hrayshat ES. A parabolic solar
cooker with automatic two axes sun tracking system. Appl Energy
2010;87:46370.
[118] Petela R. Exergy analysis of the solar cylindricalparabolic cooker. Solar
Energy 2005;79:22133.
[119] Shukla SK. Comparison of energy and exergy efciency of community and
domestic type parabolic solar cookers. Int J Green Energy 2009;6:43749.
[120] Pohekar SD, Ramachandran M. Multi-criteria evaluation of cooking energy
alternatives for promoting parabolic solar cooker in India. Renew Energy
2004;29:144960.
[121] Pohekar SD, Ramachandran M. Utility assessment of parabolic solar cooker as
a domestic cooking device in India. Renew Energy 2006;31:182738.
[122] Nahar NM. Performance and testing of an improved solar water heater cum
steam cooker. Int J Energy Res 1985;9(1):1136.
[123] Malhotra KS, Nahar NM, Ramana Rao BV. Optimization factor of solar ovens.
Solar Energy 1983;31(2):2357.
[124] Nahar NM. Performance and testing of a low cost solar water heater cum
solar cooker. Solar Wind Technol 1988;5(6):6115.
[125] Nahar NM. Performance and testing of an improved hot box solar cooker.
Energy Convers Manage 1990;30(1):916.
[126] Nahar NM. Performance studies of a large size non-tracking solar cooker.
Renew Energy 1992;2:42130.
[127] Nahar NM, Gupta JP, Sharma P. Design, development and testing of a large-
size solar cooker for animal feed. Appl Energy 1994;48:295304.
[128] Nahar NM, Gupta JP, Sharma P. A novel solar cooker for animal feed. Energy
Convers Manage 1996;37(1):7780.
[129] Nahar NM, Gupta JP, Sharma P. Performance and testing of two models of
solar cooker for animal feed. Renew Energy 1996;7(1):4750.
[130] Khalifa AMA, Taha MMA, Akyurt M. An energy thrifty solar cooker the mina
oven. Solar Wind Technol 1984;1(2):8191.
[131] Khalifa AMA, Taha MMA, Akyurt M. Design, simulation and testing of a new
concentrating type solar cooker. Solar Energy 1987;38(2):7988.
[132] Tiwari GN, Yadav YP. A new solar cooker design. Energy Convers Manage
1986;26(1):412.
[133] Nandwani SS. Experimental and theoretical analysis of a simple solar oven in
the climate of Costa Rica I. Solar Wind Technol 1988;5(2):15970.
[134] Al-Saad MA, Jubran BA. The performance of a low cost clay solar cooker.
Renew Energy 1991;1:61721.
[135] Grupp M, Montagne P, Wackernagel M. A novel advanced box-type solar
cooker. Solar Energy 1991;47(2):10713.
[136] Nandwani SS, Gomez OF. Comparative study of conventional and SBCI
cardboard solar ovens. Renew Energy 1993;3:60720.
[137] Wareham RC. Parameters for a solar cooker program. Renew Energy
1997;10:2179.
[138] Beaumont G, Eiloart T, Robinson P. Ultra low cost solar cookers: design details
and eld trials in Tanzania. Renew Energy 1997;10(4):63540.
[139] Suharta H, Sayigh AM, Abdullah K, Mathew K. The comparison of three types
of Indonesian solar box cookers. Renew Energy 2001;22:37987.
[140] Sonune AV, Philip SK. Development of a domestic concentrating cooker.
Renew Energy 2003;28:122534.
[141] Negi BS, Purohit I. Experimental investigation of a box type solar cooker
employing a non-tracking concentrator. Energy Convers Manage
2005;46:577604.
[142] El-Sebaii AA, Ibrahim A. Experimental testing of a box-type solar cooker using
the standard procedure of cooking power. Renew Energy 2005;30:186171.
[143] Cornell Solar Oven Team. Design of solar oven for use in the developing
world. Int J Service Learning Eng 2006; 2: 7891.
[144] Nandwani SS. Design, construction and study of a hybrid solar food processor
in the climate of Costa Rica. Renew Energy 2007;32:42741.
[145] Kurt H, Deniz E, Recebli Z. An investigation into the effects of box geometries
on the thermal performance of solar cookers. Int J Green Energy
2008;5(6):50819.
[146] Schwarzer K, Silva MEV. Characterization and design methods of solar
cookers. Solar Energy 2008;82:15763.
[147] Kumar N, Agravat S, Chavda T, Mistry HN. Design and development of
efcient multipurpose domestic solar cookers/dryers. Renew Energy
2008;33:220711.
[148] Kumar N, Chavda T, Mistry HN. A truncated pyramid non-tracking type
multipurpose domestic solar cooker/hot water system. Appl Energy
2010;87:4717.
[149] Bello AMA, Makinde V, Sulu HT. performance tests and thermal efciency
evaluation of a constructed solar box cooker at a Guinea Savannah Station
(Ilorin, Nigeria). J Am Sci 2010;6(2).
[150] Grupp M, Balmer M, Beall B, Bergler H, Cieslok J, Hancock D, et al. On-line
recording of solar cooker use rate by a novel metering device. Prototype
description and experimental verication of output data. Solar Energy
2009;83:2769.
[151] Zhou SJ, Zhang XS. Comparison of two kinds of solar collector/energy storage.
In: First international conference on building energy and environment,
Dalian, China; 1316 July 2008.
[152] Kurt H, Atik K, Ozkaymak M, Recebli Z. Thermal performance parameters
estimation of hot box type solar cooker by using articial neural network. Int
J Therm Sci 2008;47:192200.
[153] Hernandez-Luna G, Huelsz G. A solar oven for intertropical zones: evaluation
of the cooking process. Energy Convers Manage 2008;49:36226.
[154] Prasanna UR, Umanand L. Optimization and design of energy transport
system for solar cooking application. Appl Energy 2011;88:24251.
[155] Prasanna UR, Umanand L. Modeling and design of a solar thermal system for
hybrid cooking application. Appl Energy 2011;88:174055.
[156] Saitoh TS, El-Ghetany HH. Solar water-sterilization system with thermally-
controlled ow. Appl Energy 1999;64:38799.
[157] Chaudhuri TK. Estimation of electrical backup for solar box cooker. Renew
Energy 1999;17:56972.
[158] Abu-Malouh R, Abdallah S, Muslih IM. Design, construction and operation of
spherical solar cooker with automatic sun tracking system. Energy Convers
Manage 2011;52:61520.
[159] Ekechukwu OV, Ugwuoke NT. Design and measured performance of a plane
reector augmented box-type solar-energy cooker. Renew Energy
2003;28:193552.
[160] Jaramillo OA, Huelsz G, Hernandez-Luna G, del Rio JA, Acosta R, Arriaga LG.
Solar oven for intertropical zones: optogeometrical design. Energy Convers
Manage 2007;48(10):264956.
[161] Mohamad MA, El-Ghetany HH, Dayem AMA. Design, construction and eld
test of hot-box solar cookers for African Sahel Region. Renew Energy
1998;14:4954.
[162] Hussain M, Das KC, Huda A. The performance of a box-type solar cooker with
auxiliary heating. Renew Energy 1997;12(2):1515.
[163] Schwarzer K, Eugenia M, Silva V. Solar cooking system with or without heat
storage for families and institutions. Solar Energy 2003;75:3541.
[164] Khalifa AMA, Taha MMA, Akyurt M. Solar cookers for outdoor and indoors.
Energy 1985;10(7):81929.
[165] Mullick SC, Kandpal TC, Kumar S. Testing of box-type solar cooker: second
gure of merit F
2
and its variation with load and number of pots. Solar Energy
1996;57:40913.
[166] Patil SR, Patil PS, Hussain M, Samdarshi SK. Parameter investigation on
thermal performance of box-type solar cookers using existing models. In:
Eighth world renewable energy congress, Denver, Colorado, USA; 28th
August3rd September 2004.
[167] Yadav YP, Tiwari GN. Transient analytical study of box-type solar cooker.
Energy Convers Manage 1987;27(2):1215.
[168] Medved S, Oman J, Novak P. Numerical model and parametric analyses of an
inatable solar heater. Solar Energy 1999;65(4):26370.
[169] Kablan MM. Forecasting the demand on solar water heating systems and
their energy savings potential during the period 20012005 in Jordan. Energy
Convers Manage 2003;44:202736.
[170] Diallo MS, Sarr J, Sow ML, Mbow C, Ba B, Thiam A, et al. Photothermal
conversion in a solar collector with tilted walls. Int J Phys Sci
2009;4(12):8607.
[171] Fared C, Andres M, Diego E, Hector IV, Carlos L. Radiation model for predicting
temperature evolution in solar cooker. Dyna-Colombia 2011;78(166):6874.
[172] El-Sebaii AA. Thermal performance of a box-type solar cooker with outer-
inner reectors. Energy 1997;22(10):96978.
[173] Terres H, Ortega JA, Gordon M, Morales JR, Lizard A. Heating of bee honey,
olive oil, milk and water in a solar box type with internal reectors. In:
Energy sustainability conference, Long Beach, California, USA; 2730 June
2007.
[174] Olwi I, Khalifa A. Numerical modelling and experimental testing of a solar
grill. J Solar Energy Eng Trans ASME 1993;115(1):510.
[175] Bidotnark AK, Turkmen N. Modelling of a hot box solar cooker. Energy
[176] Jubran BA, Alsaad MA. Parametric study of a box-type solar cooker. Energy
[177] Mawire A, McPherson M, van den Heetkamp RRJ. Discharging simulations of
a thermal energy storage (TES) system for an indirect solar cooker. Solar
Energy Mater Solar Cells 2010;94(6):11006.
[178] Mawire A, McPherson M. Experimental and simulated temperature
distribution of an oil-pebble bed thermal energy storage system with a
variable heat source. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29:108695.
[179] Parishwad GV, Bhardwaj RK, Nema VK. Estimation of hourly solar radiation
for India. Renew Energy 1997;12:30313.
[180] Meyer EL, Van Dyk EE. Development of energy model based on total daily
irradiation and maximum ambient temperature. Renew Energy
2000;21(1):3747.
[181] Sen Z, Tan E. Simple models of solar radiation data for northwestern part of
Turkey. Energy Convers Manage 2001;42(5):58798.
[182] Wong LT, Chow WK. Solar radiation model. Appl Energy 2001;69:191224.
[183] Jebaraj S, Iniyan S. A review of energy models. Renew Sust Energy Rev
2006;10:281311.
[184] Purohit I. Testing of solar cookers and evaluation of instrumentation error.
Renew Energy 2010;35:205364.
[185] Kumar S. Estimation of design parameters for thermal performance
evaluation of box-type solar cooker. Renew Energy 2005;30:111726.
[186] Kumar S, Kandpal TC, Mullick SC. Heat losses from a paraboloid concentrator
solar cooker: experimental investigations on effect of reector orientation.
Renew Energy 1993;3(8):8716.
[187] Kumar S, Kandpal TC, Mullick SC. Effect of wind on the thermal performance
of a parabolloid concentrator solar cooker. Renew Energy 1994;4(3):3337.
[188] Yeh HM, Ho CD, Hou JZ. Collector efciency of double-ow solar air heaters
with ns attached. Energy 2002;27:71527.
[189] Rathore N, Shukla SK. Experimental investigations and comparison of energy
and exergy efciencies of the box type and parabolic solar cooker. In: Third
international conference on energy sustainability, San Francisco, California,
USA; 1923 July 2009.
[190] Ibrahim SMA, Elreidy MK. The performance of a solar cooker in Egypt. Renew
Energy 1995;6(8):104150.
[191] Gayapershad R, Dladla ST, Brooks MJ. Performance evaluation of commercial
solar cookers under equal loading conditions. In: IASTED International
conference on power, energy and applications, Gaborone, Botswana; 1113
September 2006.
[192] Shukla SK, Gupta SK. Performance evaluation of concentrating solar cooker
under Indian climatic conditions. In: Second international conference on
energy sustainability, Jacksonville, Florida, USA; 1014 August 2008.
[193] Barker JED. The solar nest a very low cost solar cooker. Solar world
congress of the international-solar-energy-society, Beijing, China; 1821
September 2007.
[194] Bell J. Glazing selection. Australian cooperative research centre for renewable
energy school of mechanical. Manufacturing and Medical Engineering
Queensland University of Technology.
[195] American Society of Heating. Refrigeration and air conditioning engineers.
ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals. Atlanta; 1991.
[196] Hussain M, Khan MSI. Fabrication of and performance studies on a low cost
solar cooker having an inclined aperture plane. Renew Energy 1996;9:
7625.
[197] Ozkaymak M. Theoretical and experimental investigation of a hot box-type
solar cooker performance. Proc Inst Mech Eng A J Power Energy
2007;221:917.
[198] Mawire A, van den Heetkamp RRJ, McPherson M, Zhandire E. Data acquisition
and control of a thermal energy storage and cooking system. In: International
conference on computer as a tool, Belgrade, Serbia & Montenegro; 2124
November 2005.
[199] Joshi JB, Pandit AB, Patel SB, Singhal RS, Bhide GK, Mariwala KV, et al.
Development of efcient designs of cooking systems. I experimental. Ind
Eng Chem Res 2012;51(4):187896.
[200] Joshi JB, Pandit AB, Patel SB, Singhal RS, Bhide GK, Mariwala KV, et al.
Development of efcient designs of cooking systems. II computational uid
dynamics and optimization. Ind Eng Chem Res 2012;51(4):
1897922.
[201] Franco J, Cadena C, Saravia L. Multiple use communal solar cookers. Solar
Energy 2004;77:21723.
[202] Bushnell DL. Performance studies of solar energy storing heat exchanger.
Solar Energy 1988;41(6):50312.
[203] Bushnell DL, Sohi M. A modular phase change heat exchanger for a solar oven.
Solar Energy 1992;49(4):23544.
[204] Buddhi D, Sahoo LK. Solar cooker with latent heat storage: design and
experimental testing. Energy Convers Manage 1997;38(5):4938.
[205] Vandana K. Designing reless cooker of indigenous insulation material for
better heat retention. J Human Ecol 2010;30(2):99104.
[206] Nyahoro PK, Johnson RR, Edwards J. Simulated performance of thermal
storage in a solar cooker. ISES 1995: Solar world congress, Harare, Zimbabwe;
0916 September 1995.
[207] Bollin E. Transparent insulation in various solar applications. In: Second
world renewable energy congress, reading, England; 1318 September 1992.
[208] Kumar N, Vishwanath G, Gupta A. An exergy based test protocol for truncated
pyramid type solar box cooker. Energy 2011;36:57105.
[209] Jing L, Liu H, Zhao H, Lu Z, Wu H, Wang H, et al. Design of novel compound
Fresnel lens for high-performance photovoltaic concentrator. Int J
Photoenergy 2012 [article ID 630692].
[210] Barlev D, Vidu R, Stroeve P. Innovation in concentrated solar power. Solar
Energy Mater Solar Cells 2011;95:270325.
[211] Xie WT, Dai YJ, Wang RZ, Sumathy K. Concentrated solar energy applications
using Fresnel lenses: a review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2011;15:2588606.
[212] Huang H, Su Y, Gao Y, Riffat S. Design analysis of a Fresnel lens concentrating
PV cell. Int J Low-Carbon Technol 2011;6(3):16570.
[213] Valmiki MM, Li P, Heyer J, Morgan M, Albinali A, Alhamidi K, et al. A novel
application of a Fresnel lens for a solar stove and solar heating. Renew Energy
2011;36:161420.
[214] Chemisana D, Ibanez M. Linear Fresnel concentrators for building integrated
applications. Energy Convers Manage 2010;51:147680.
[215] Wu Y, Eames P, Mallick T, Sabry M. Experimental characterisation of a Fresnel
lens photovoltaic concentrating system. Solar Energy 2012;86:43040.
[216] Nandwani SS. Solar cookers cheap technology with high ecological benets.
Ecol Econ 1996;17:7381.
[217] Escobar EM. Low budget solar cookers: an alternative to diminish the use of
wood as a source of fuel. Renew Energy 1996;9:7547.
[218] Kralova I, Sjoblom J. Biofuels-renewable energy sources: a review. J Disper Sci
Technol 2010;31(3):40925.
[219] Lahkar PJ, Bhamu RK, Samdarshi SK. Enabling inter-cooker thermal
performance comparison based on cooker opto-thermal ratio (COR). Appl
Energy 2012;99:4915.
[220] El-Sebaii AA, Al-Ghamdi AA, Al-Hazmi FS, Faidah AS. Thermal performance of
a single basin solar still with PCM as a storage medium. Appl Energy
2009;86:118795.

A Comprehensive Review On Solar Cookers

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

A Comprehensive Review On Solar Cookers

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

A comprehensive review on solar cookers

, Pinar Mert Cuce

and the cooker

is the average illumination intensity level. There

Вам также может понравиться