Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
1%29, 1981
Printed in Great Britain.
0038-092X/81/ff'/0019-11502.00/0
Pergamon Press Ltd.
~ .
eW
~-~E'E~OR \ ,
#/'-COVER
//
' '----CLEARANCE
Fig. 1. A schematic diagram showing the CPC under investigation.
modelled using heat transfer analysis. This becomes an
indispensable step for the present study since no
empirical equations have been developed to predict the
loss coefficients for the CPC. Modeling of thermal processes enables one to predict temperatures in the collector, which are in turn useful to predict the loss
coefficients.
The thermal efficiency of the collector can be found
once the temperatures are available. However, for completeness sake, the efficiency will also be calculated using
efficiency equations developed using Hottel-WhillierWoertz-Bliss (HWWB) formalism[21-23]. In practice,
the CPC will be used as a part of the integrated system,
which employs a heat exchanger in the collector loop.
The heat exchanger penalty factor is important to the
performance of the total system. This factor can not be
found without values of the collector efficiency factor
and the heat removal factor. Since these factors appear
in the HWWB formalism, its development is essential
from the application standpoint.
In the Performance section of this paper, a parametric
20
C.K. HSIEH
study will be made to evaluate the collector performance. Computer programs will be used to run numerical
experiments for a wide range of test conditions. Performance will be compared with emphasis on the collector efficiency factor, the heat removal factor and the
thermal efficiency changes. It is hoped that, through
publication of this paper, the thermal analysis of the
CPC collector can be brought to a level of thoroughness
comparable to what we have today with the flat-plate
collector analysis.
ANALYSIS
CR = sin 0ma--'--"-~
(1)
is given as [25]
Aa
Hb(i)[a~(i) + ~.T~(I)jS~p~ ] ~
qb.. =
2~
(2)
(3)
where
A, = 2~rr,L.
the second term in the bracket accounts for radiation
reflected from the envelope, rereflected from the cover
and finally absorbed by the envelope. The third term
takes into consideration the reflected energy from the
receiver jacket and incident on the envelope. This last
term is small if the receiver jacket has a black surface.
Both second and third terms account for second-order
effects.
It is noted that the area ratio (AdAa) appearing in the
second term inside the bracket in eqn (3) is originated
from the shape factor According to geometry, all the
energy leaving the receiver envelope can, with the help
of the parabolic mirror, reach the cover. However, only a
fraction (AdAa) of the energy leaving the cover can
21
. ~
. [
=_=,.
,,
A,]A~
(4)
z
p=l
(5)
2~x
_ ~- ( +-- 2~Ae+
)A,A,~
i pepap., A. ~
-~.--~ (7)
_(
__ A )A Aa
Hdr,~p,'r~pa, 1 + prpe
Aa A,
(8)
tr(T 4 - T~)
I1+- 1A)A,
' ,(r
0o)
(6)
qd.~=Hd'rop,,a,
qa.,
(9)
tatr(T 4 -
T~)~-
(11)
fir
(12)
?'it
(13)
C. K. HSIEH
22
(ATy/4
(14)
(15)
Aa
(16)
(17)
T~+
(18)
Ua,
= [rr.oln(r,.o/r,.,) A,]-'
L
+~
where the first term inside the bracket estimates the glass
conductive resistance, the second term, convective film
resistance. Depending on the types of concentric tubes
used for the receiver, this film resistance can be either
the resistances inside the annulus and the central return
tube (Owen-Illinois design), or the resistance inside a
small U-shaped tubing (GE design, see Fig. 1). In the
former[29, 30] can be referred to for h equations. In the
latter, because of the small tubing size, the flow is
expected to be laminar and is fully developed, which
permits using[31]
Nu = 4.364
(20)
for a constant heat flux condition. Consequently, A,/hA
in the bracket becomes
AdhA = r,.o/(2.182kt)
(21)
6
NE
v
-R
.d"
{
2
o
50
I
250
300
ITs~ ) To~('C/m)
Fig. 4. Linearizationof the free convectivecoefficientequation.
(19)
(22)
(23)
(24)
(25)
23
(26)
A~
(27)
(30)
~,
A, \E,
_
r'~Uo/b - ea~ ~
r',,
/
~- h/b.
(31)
Q. = A r [ S ' - U L ( T r - Tb)]
(32)
where
S' = Ht%p'- ~,,z,a,fp(A-,JA,).-
(33)
Note that T, in eqns (25) and (32) refers to the receiverjacket temperature.
Another way of rewriting Q, is to express it in terms
of the mean fluid temperature Tf,
Tf =
(T~ + To)/2.
(34)
(35)
G = tn/Ao.
With the help of FR, Q. can be related to the fluid inlet
temperature T~ as follows.
Q, = F R A , [ S ' - UL(T~ - Tb)].
(38)
(29)
(37)
where
(28)
ULF' ]~
Gc--~-R) J J
FR - Gcv(CR) { 1 - exp[
(CR) = p~
= ?e =
(39)
eqns (32), (35) and (38) can be readily reduced to flatplate collector equations, which is not unexpected.
Another point of interest is that, if FR/F' is plotted vs
Gcp/F'UL, a family of curves as shown in Fig. 5 can be
obtained. For CPC collectors the curves rise more
rapidly than a flat-plate collector (labeled CR= 1). In
practice, because of the small UL value typical for a
CPC collector, the points on the curves are further shifted
to the right, which enables the FR/F' to stay well within
the asymptotic region of the curves, a desirable feature
from the heat gain standpoint.
It is also noted that, in the flat-plate collector analysis,
because of the trend of the FR/F' curve, an increase of
flow rate is considered unnecessary for a liquid collector
if FR/F' value is already high on the curve. Such an
observation is also valid for the CPC. In fact, the usually
high FR/F' value typical for a CPC makes the collector
efficiency nearly independent of G in most practical
cases.
It is easy to see that the three versions of Q, equations
derived above all share a common weakness in that the
I.(3
O.8
k 0.6
~m 0.4
0.2
~ x..1R
0.2
i i ]
t.O
I i I
IO
GCp
F"UL
K)O
24
C. K. HSmH
+ (1
(40)
where all notations in this equation have been defined
previously. A comparison between eqns (38) and (40)
reveals that the improvement lies in the presence of the
second term inside the braces of the equation. Physically, such a term adds to the useful heat gain.
It is now possible to write four efficiency equations
based on eqns (32), (35), (38) and (40). Following the
definition of the collector thermal efficiency
Qu
(41)
~1 - H , A o
where
(42)
H, = H~,(i) + Hd
four
efficiency
equations
UL
,7 = ,1oF'-
ULF'
as
(43)
H,(CR) (Ts -
Tb)
(44)
ULF,~
,1 = ,}oFR - H---7~-~ ( T~ - Tb )
(45)
ULFR
n = (no + F,,)F~ - ~
(r, - r~)
(46)
%
I/(Uo/bAa)
II(UoIbA(~
I/(Ue/oAe )
J/(Ue/aAe)
"re
I/(Ur/eAr)
ll(Urle A r)
rr
(a) Cover Absorption
Neglected
rr
(b) Cover Absorption
Included
where
~o = ~
H;
~,,p,,, tea,IV
FA = Ht(CR) [~o(1
(47)
ULA_..___z_r
- ~,) Ue/aA,:
Ht(l-Ta)~ ULA, ]
+(1-?,)(~aq H',(1 ~ ) / ~ J "
(48)
thcp(To- %)
H,Aa
(50)
25
=
e
0.0211 m
0.0222 m
r~o
i and 2)
0.1128 m
1.1271 m
0.0264 m
rr, i =
=
(refer to F i s s .
ri
0.0030 m
clearance + r e - rr, = 0 . 0 0 5 0 + 0 . 0 2 6 4 - 0 . 0 2 2 2 = 0 . 0 0 9 2 m
966 W/m 2
Hd
I00 W / m 2
Ambient Conditions:
Tb
20C
Ti
25C
5 m/s
Material Properties:
aa
Pa
~a = 0.05
0.05
~a =
~a
0.9
~e
Pe
~e = 0.05
re
ar
~e =
~r =
Pr
0.15
0.05
Pm
0.85
ca
0.6
0.85
Ee
0.85
Er
k
0.9
0.85
0.05
=. 0.779 W / m C
=
=
0.0162 kg~s
3224 J/kg-C
26
C.K. HSIErl
IOC
5C
I-
Wat-
W
(3.
i,i
I-
I
t
L
I
I
I
I
50
IOO
INLET TEMPERATURE,T i ( % )
50
INLET
I00
TEMPERATURE, T i (*C)
0.6
-t-b
Zhi
0.4
8
O3
02
I
IO0
RECEIVER JACKET
I
150
TEMPERATURE,T r (*C)
As has just been shown in Fig. 9, the thermal resistance between the receiver jacket and the enclosure
dominates the total heat loss from the collector. Since
U,/e is directly proportional to (T2+T2)(T,+T,)
product (see eqn 29), any drop in Tr or T, will lower U,/e,
thus resulting in a drop of UL. This point is demonstrated
in Fig. 8, where the closed symbol represent U when the
ambient temperature is dropped by 10C. In this case, the
drop of U is primarily a result of the decline of Te value
as shown in Fig. 7.
While the effect of the ambient temperature on the
heat loss coefficients is quite pronounced, effects from
other parameters are rather small. As is shown in Fig. 10,
both UL and Uo values stay within narrow bands for
parameter changes listed in the legend. The upper limit
of the band is a result of changing concentration ratio CR
from 1.6 to 1.95, while the lower bound is obtained by
changing insolation H, from 1066 to 640 W/m 2. Variations of flow rate m, the average number of reflections fi
and gap size g have little effect on U values. It should be
noted that such a trend is partly a result of the selection
of coordinate axes in the plot. Since the receiver
jacket temperature has been chosen for the x-axis, and
U,I,, being dominant in U~,, is proportional to the
receiver temperature as just mentioned, the change of U
might not be large in such a plot.
Thermal
0.6
analysis
1.0(3
j
Z[/
0.9 c.
27
of CPC collectors
I
-- control
CR=1.6-1.95
g =0.0092-0.0109 m
/7
~=o.6-oz
ff'1=0.0162-0.0486 koJs
//0.96
-o
a
[:3
~r
E
0.97
~~z-du /
0.9E
0.95
~0,4
Control
-,..a ~
Tb: I0 *C
h:O.9
CR= 1.95
Ht = 6 4 0 W / m z
rh = 0 . 0 4 8 6 kg/s
Gop=O.OlO9m
I
RECEIVER
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
IOO
150
JACKET T E M P E R A T U R E , T r (*C)
I
L
I00
JACKET
RECEIVER
1
I
150
TEMPERATURE,Tr(C)
FR= Gco(CR)
{1- exp[
UL
ULF'I~
GC-~-R)J J'
ULF' I
ULF'
Gcp--~--R)J= 1 Gcp(CR)
exp
(51)
F'.
(52)
(37)
I ~ O t t l l ] l l l l
04
0.9
z
0.96
"Tb=
I0oC
-o- Control
0.97
0.96
0.95
A
[]
~ =0.9
CR= 1.95
H l = 6 4 0 W/m 2
rh = 0 . 0 4 8 6 kg,~
Gop:O.0109 m
RECEIVER
J
I
IOO
JACKET
0.2
I
I
150
TEMPERATURE,T r ( % )
+ Experiment[ 3 5 , 3 6 ]
--o- Control
Tb= I0O C
zx
[]
fi : 0 . 9
CR:1.95
z
Hl = 6 4 0 W / m
rh =0.0486 kg/s
Gop:O.OlO9m
Q05
(Ti - T b ) / H t
0.1
(C m2/W)
28
C.K. HSEH
Some conclusions can be drawn based on the observations made in this study. They are delineated as follows.
(1) The use of selective coating and vacuum surrounding the receiver jacket makes the thermal resistance
between the receiver jacket and the envelope overwhelmingly dominant in the total resistance network. As
a result, the efficiency of the collector is quite insensitive
to the change of operating conditions for the CPC.
Because of the high values of F ' and FR, the collector
efficiency is predominantly determined by the optical
efficiency of the collector and, for this reason, directly
proportional to the cover transmittance "L, the apparent
reflectance of the CPC p,n,~ the envelope transmittance "~e
and the receiver absorptance 6r. The effect of the gap
size is somewhat smaller because of the dependence of
7o on p. So is the effect of the concentration ratio
because of the dependence of 7o on H',. Every effort
must therefore be made in practice to upgrade material
properties in order to improve the efficiency,
(2) The slope of the efficiency curves is quite insensitive to most of the operating conditions tested for
the collector. For a given collecter UL increases at high
operating temperatures; however, both F ' and FR decline as the temperature is increased. These trends tend to
offset each other and, as a result, the efficiency of the
CPC remains high at high operating temperatures. On the
other hand, from the efficiency equations, an increase of
CR decreases the slope of the efficiency curve, but it also
lowers the elevation of the curve because of the presence
of H', term in the optical efficiency. Hence, it is not
desirable to use a CPC collector of high CR at a location
where the diffuse radiation is large. In general, the
efficiency curve for the CPC has a far smaller slope than
that of a flat-plate collector, which make the CPC particularly suited for high temperature applications.
Acknowledgement--The work reported in this paper was supported by USDOE under Contract W-31-109-ENG-38.
A
CR
c
F
f
G
g
H
h
i
j
k
L
m
Nu
n
p
Q
q
r
NOMENCLATURE
area
concentration ratio
specific heat
F'= Uo/UL(eqn 36)
FR (eqn 37)
FA (eqn 48)
multireflection correction factor
rh/A,,
gap
solar flux
convective coefficient
incident angle on cover
incident angle on receiver envelope
incident angle on receiver jacket
thermal conductivity
length of trough
mass flow rate
Nusselt number
number of reflections
eqn (5)
heat flow
heat flux
radius
T temperature
U loss coefficient
component loss coefficient
overall loss coefficient
V wind speed
W half-width of aperture
Greekletters
~
n
0
p
~-
absorptivity
emissivity
efficiency
acceptance half-angle
reflectivity
Stefan-Boltzmann constant
transmissivity
Subscripts
A enclosure absorption
a collector cover
b ambient
beam component
c convection
d diffuse component
e receiver envelope
f fluid
gi receiver
jacket wall
inside radius
inlet
REFERENCES
1. R. Winston, Principles of solar concentrators of a novel
design. Solar Energy 16, 89 (1974).
2. V. K. Baranov, Parabolocylindric reflecting unit and its properties. Geliotecknika 11(3-4), 45-52 (English Translation,
pp. 36-41) (1975).
3. R. Winston and H. Hinterberger, Principles of cylindrical
concentrators for solar energy. Solar Energy 17, 253 (1975).
4. A. Rabl, Solar concentrators with maximal concentration for
cylindrical absorbers. Appl. Opt. 15, 1871 (1976).
5. A. Rabl and R. Winston, Ideal concentrators for finite
sources and restricted exit angles. Appl. Opt. 15, 2880 (1976).
6. A. Rabl, Comparison of solar concentrators. Solar Energy
18, 93 (1976).
7. A. Rabl, Optical and thermal properties of compound
parabolic concentrators. Solar Energy 18, 497 (1976).
8. A. Rabl, Radiation transfer through specular passages--a
simple approximation. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 22, 323
(1977).
9. N. B. Goodman et al., Optical and Thermal design considerations for ideal light collectors. Sharing the Sun 2, 336
(1976).
10. J. F. Kreider, Performance Study of the Compound
Parabolic Concentrator Solar collector. Environmental
Consulting Services, Boulder, Colorado (1974).
11. J. F. Kreider, Thermal Performance of the Compound
Parabolic Concentrator Solar Collector-Phase II. Environmental Consulting Services, Inc., Boulder, Colorado (1975).
12. D. R. Mills and J. Giutronich, Asymmetrical nonimaging cylindrical solar concentrators. Solar Energy 20, 45 (1978).
13. A. Rabl et al., Practical design considerations for CPC solar
collectors. Solar Energy 22, 373 (1979).
14. M. M. Shapiro, Non-focusing solar concentrators of easy
manufacture. Solar Energy 19, 211 (1977).
15. R. E. Jones, Jr. and G. C. Anderson, Optical properties of
compound circular arc concentractors. Solar Energy 21, 149
(1978).
16. E. F. Gurnee, Comparison of elliptical and parabolic nonimaging concentrators. Solar Energy 19, 323 (1977).
29
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.