Heat Transfer Engineering

ISSN: 0145-7632 (Print) 1521-0537 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uhte20

A complete design data and performance

parameter evaluation of a pilot scale solar updraft
tower

Ramakrishna Balijepalli, V. P. Chandramohan & K. Kirankumar

To cite this article: Ramakrishna Balijepalli, V. P. Chandramohan & K. Kirankumar (2019): A

complete design data and performance parameter evaluation of a pilot scale solar updraft tower,
Heat Transfer Engineering, DOI: 10.1080/01457632.2018.1546811

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01457632.2018.1546811

Published online: 19 Jan 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uhte20
HEAT TRANSFER ENGINEERING
https://doi.org/10.1080/01457632.2018.1546811

A complete design data and performance parameter evaluation of a pilot

scale solar updraft tower
Ramakrishna Balijepalli, V. P. Chandramohan, and K. Kirankumar
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Warangal, Warangal, Telangana State, India

ABSTRACT
Renewable energy sources are the best alternative for giving solution to the energy
shortage and CO2 emission problems. Solar updraft tower is a relative novel technology for
electricity production from solar energy. It consists of three main components; a solar air
collector with absorber plate, central chimney, and a turbine. The objective of this work is
to present complete design parameters of individual components of a small and less expen-
sive prototype solar updraft tower. The main contents of this study are; solar radiation
calculations, chimney design, solar wind turbine design calculations, heat loss and pressure
loss estimations for collector. The pilot solar chimney power plant considered in this work
consists of an air collector diameter of 3.5-m, the chimney diameter and height are 0.6 and
6 m, respectively. Theoretically the maximum velocity of air is achieved at chimney base is
1.9 m/s. The overall efficiency of the plant is estimated as 0.0019%.

Introduction support costs [2]. The possibility of solar chimney

Since quite a while, we are an exceptionally
acquainted with the different vitality sources on a vast
premise, for example, oil, atomic, coal, and gas.
Constant utilization of these fossil fuels makes numer-
ous issues to be specific, diminishment of fossil
powers assets, a worldwide temperature alteration,
ecological concerns and increment of fuel cost. In
view of these reasons, the existed ceremonious energy
sources won’t be agreeable to adapt to the always
upgrading power prerequisites. Consequently, grave
and tireless commitments are made in examining the
conceivable outcomes of misusing energy from differ-
ent nontraditional energy assets which are experienced
as a potential answer for the rising global power chal-
lenges [1]. Solar updraft tower (SUT) is a present day
innovation which gives crucial answers for the today’s
overwhelming vitality challenges. Solar chimney power
plant does not need cooling water like traditional
power generating plants (such as thermal
power plants).
Solar chimney converts only a little rate of the
aggregated sun radiant energy into useful power. Be
that as it may, it can conquer this disadvantage by
making a reasonable, furrowed development with least
plant innovation was principally presented in 1931
and after subsequent reviews; the primary Spanish
model SUT having a stack stature of 195 meters and a
most extreme power era of 50 kW was constructed
and charged in Manzanares, Spain in 1982. This work
presumed that viable power generation is conceivable
with the utilization of substantial scale solar chimney
power plants (400 MW).
Preparatory examinations were completed by Haaf
[3] in a SUT power plant. This work examined and
dissected about the thermal energy proportionalities,
the effectiveness of the solar collector, different losses
in pressure head and turbine misfortunes with refer-
ence to 24-hour time period. Comparative kind of
works was examined in Zhou et al. [4] and Pretorius
and Kr€ oger [5].
A new SUT power plant (floating type) was pro-
posed by Zhou and Yang [6] on barren mountains up
to thousands of meters high in northwest China.
Outcome of the research revealed that the overall effi-
ciency of the plant is higher compared to conventional
SUT due to larger chimney effect. This plant pro-
duced a total power of 25,761 TWh per year, can ful-
fill some of the energy demand of whole world.

CONTACT Dr. V. P. Chandramohan vpcm80@gmail.com Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Warangal,
Warangal, Telangana State 506 004 India.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/uhte.
ß 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 R. BALIJEPALLI ET AL.

Nomenclature
A 2
Area, (m ) Greek symbols
b Width of the blade section, (m) a Angle of attack, ( )
c1, c2 ap Absorptivity of absorber plate
and c3 Constants b Turbine blade pitch angle, ( )
Cp Specific heat, (kJ/kg K) d Solar declination, ( )
C Coefficient DT Temperature difference
CFD Computational fluid dynamics DP Pressure difference
D Diameter, (m) g Efficiency, (%)
e Extinction coefficient, (m
1) e Emissivity
E Energy (or) flux, (W) c Azimuthal collector orientation, ( )
F Force, (N) c1 Lapse rate of ambient temperature, (K/m)
g Acceleration due to gravity, (m/s2) / Latitude, ( ) and relative wind angle, ( )
L Distance between the plate and the cover, (m) q Reflectivity
hw Wind loss coefficient, (W/m2K) qair Density of the air, (kg/m3)
hL Linearized radiation coefficient, (W/m2K) r Stephan-Boltzmann constant, (W/m2 K4)
hc Convective heat transfer coefficient, (W/m2K) f Collector slope angle, ( )
hr Radiative heat transfer coefficient, (W/m2K) hZ Solar zenith angle, ( )
H Hight, (m) s Transmissivity
I Incident beam of flux, (W/m2) sa Transmissivity absorptivity product
IA Radiation assimilated by absorber plate, (W/m2) h Angle of incidence (or) obliquity angle, ( )
IB Beam radiation, (W/m2) x Rotational speed of the turbine, (rpm)
IBN Incident beam of flux normal to the collector, (W/m2) xs solar hour angle, ( )
ID Diffuse radiation, (W/m2) xst The hour angle at sunset and sunrise, ( )
IG Global radiation, (W/m2) t Kinematic viscosity of air, (m2/s)
k Thermal conductivity, (W/m.K)
m Mass flow rate, (kg/s) Subscripts
N Number of rotations per minute, (rpm) a Ambient or absorption
P Power, (W) act Actual
Q Heat transfer rate, (W) c Glass cover
QL Rate of energy loss, (W) ch Chimney
r Radius of blade segment from the hub, (m) coll Collector
R Turbine blade tip radius, (m) and Resistance, (K/W) D Drag
RC Radius of the collector, (m) h Hot air
S The solar constant, (W/m2) i1 First component of polarization
Sh Sunshine hours, i2 Second component of polarization
SUT Solar updraft tower L Lift
T Temperature, ( C) max Maximum
tb Tilt factor for beam radiation o Overall
td Tilt factor for diffuse radiation P Absorber plate
t Time, (s) and thickness, (m) r Reflection and refraction
Uo Overall heat loss coefficient, (W/m2.K) req Required
V Velocity, (m/s) t Turbine
v1 Free stream velocity, (m/s) th Theoretical
w Relative wind speed, (m/s) u useful
YD Day of the year

Tian and Zhao [7] and Schlaich et al. [8] checked
on over solar collectors and different thermal energy
stockpiling systems. They presumed that photovoltaic
collectors are giving best general execution among the
different non-concentrating solar collectors. This work
additionally said that molten (liquid) salts were the
best materials for high-temperature thermal energy
storage applications because of their wide properties,
such as mass density, thermal conductivity, and spe-
cific heat of substance.
Some of the works shows that experimental analysis
of wind flow inside the solar chimney. Various pro-
cess parameters, such as temperature, velocity, solar
radiation, and humidity (inside & outside) were
monitored over a period of time, allowing the charac-
terization of the air flow and evaluation of the optical
properties of the materials used. Because of higher
thermal losses, a low value (<5%) of total energy con-
version efficiency was achieved [9].
An exploratory examination was conveyed about
the working of a reduced scale sun-powered tower
turbine by von Backstr€ om and Gannon. The inlet
flows direct vanes gave in their setup to upgrade the
pre-spin of air which lessens turbine exit kinetic
energy at diffuser inlet. The turbine created in the
setup delivered 85–90% aggregate to aggregate effi-
ciency and 87–90% aggregate to static effi-
ciency [10].
 HEAT TRANSFER ENGINEERING 3

A numerical model was developed by Zxou et al.

[11] to assess the physical process of a compressible
flow through SUT. In this article, FLUENT 6.1 soft-
ware was used to analyze the three-dimensional (3D)
steady numerical simulation of airflow inside the solar
chimney. Finite volume method, second order upwind
scheme and SIMPLE algorithm techniques were used
to discrete the 3D steady continuity, momentum, and
energy equations. Results of this 3D model were more
accurate when compared to previous developed mod-
els such as Boussinesq model and full buoy-
ancy model.
From this literature overview, it is seen that there
are a couple of models were produced [7, 8]. Few of
the works clarified the SUT parts, for example, turbine
and chimney. In few of the works, computational fluid
dynamics investigation was performed to recognize
the ideal parameters of the turbine. Few works
checked on the specialized and monetary issues of
SUT. Generally speaking, this setup is hugely
inspected, at the same time, there is a lack of plan
parameters as this setup includes various outline
parameters. Wind turbine application in a prototype
SUT power plant was not observed in many of litera-
ture. Additionally, analysis of the materials required
for the SUT components’ thermal and mechanical
properties were not discussed in brief. In this way, a
step is taken to address the above issues in a reason-
able way.
Along these lines, the fundamental targets of this Figure 1. Solar updraft tower power plant. (All dimensions are
work are, (1) to outline the SUT power plant seg- in mm).
ments, for example, tower (or) chimney, turbine, or process, the heat exchange takes place from hot
solar collector, (2) to evaluate the pressure head losses, absorber plate surface to the adjacent air which causes
solar radiation and heat loss computations for con- an enhancement in temperature. At this time, the hot
cluding the improved plan parameters, for example, air goes up because of buoyancy and goes into the
required collector surface region, proficiency and elec- solar tower. The pressure difference in the chimney
tricity generation of the system, (3) to choose the suit- was used to drive the wind turbine which turns a gen-
able materials for a solar collector, heat absorbing erator for power production.
plate, solar tower, wind turbine, and heat storage sys- In this analytical study, a lessened scale SUT which
tem, and (4) to organize all plan and execution comprises of a solar air collector has a distance across
parameters of SUT, so a total outline information can of 3.5-m, the tower of height 0.6-m and diameter 6-m
be given to future specialists. are considered for the successful pressure difference
across the turbine. Figure 1 demonstrates the essential
framework outline of a pilot scale SUT.
Description of methodology and design
Before going in to design, certain assumptions have
The setup comprises of solar air collector, chimney to be made for this analysis [6].
and a power producing turbine as appeared in
Figure 1. In the day time, the sun radiation incidents 1. Axisymmetric air flow in the collector inlet, that
on the top surface of the collector where a part of is, nonuniform heating of the collector surface in
irradiance is reflected, some part of energy is trans- terms of the sun’s altitude angle is neglected. In
mitted and a small amount of energy is absorbed by day time, sun’s altitude angle varies from time to
the collector plate. By the free convection heat transfer time. So that the sun’s radiant energy does not
4 R. BALIJEPALLI ET AL.
incident uniformly on collector cover.
Temperature profiles of the ground and canopy
in the collector could be different parabolic func-
tions of the collector radius by taking in to
account the axisymmetric air flow in the collector
and the functions will vary with different
solar radiations.
2. Constant environment conditions including ambi-
ent temperature and inlet air temperature.
3. Heat losses through the wall of the chimney
are neglected.
4. The air follows the ideal gas law.
5. Only the buoyancy force is considered in
the chimney.
Solar air collector
The solar collector plays the important role like heat
exchanger which converts the incident solar radiation
into useful stored energy in the air. There are essen-
tially two sorts of stationary solar collectors: noncon-
centrating or stationary and concentrating. A
nonconcentrating collector has a similar range for
capturing and for engrossing solar radiation, though a
sun-following concentrating collector has parabolic
reflecting surfaces to catch and center the sun’s radi-
ation to a shorter getting region, along these lines
expanding the radiation flux. SUT comes under the
category of nonconcentrating type collector.
Their significant reason for existing is to gather
however much sun radiant energy as could be
expected at the lower conceivable aggregate cost. The
collector ought to likewise have a long service life, in
spite of impacts of the sun’s bright ultra violet radi-
ation, accumulation of dust and moisture on the coat-
ing cover, and breakage of the glazing material as a
result of thermal expansion, hail, devastation, or dif-
ferent causes.
Solar air collector which comprises of the accompa-
nying two main segments is transparent glazing cover
and absorbing plate. Different sorts of the radiation
collector cover materials are accessible and choice of
material mostly depends on the transmittance-absorb-
ance value, nature and covering of material, sunlight
falling angle and cover extinction coefficient [7, 12].
Polymer covers and plastic sheets additionally have
high shortwave transmittance range and they receive
long wave transmittances as eminent as 0.40. Plastics
are additionally by and large restricted in the tempera-
tures they can manage without crumbling or experi-
encing dimensional changes. Just a couple sorts of
plastics can withstand the sun’s bright ultraviolet radi-
ation for longer periods [7, 12].
Anti-refluxing glazed glass is chosen as collector
cover material because it can transmit as much as
90% of the approaching shortwave sun irradiance
while transmitting for all wavelengths. Glass with low
iron content has a moderately high transmittance for
sun radiation (roughly 0.85–0.91 at typical rate).
Normal incidence transmittance values of commer-
cially available Plexi and window glasses are 0.85 and
0.87 respectively. Likewise, the collector glass is tem-
pered to the modern standard which can stand again
different climate conditions and most hails or storms.
Copper is considered as absorber plate material
because of its high thermal conductivity compared to
steel and aluminum.
Direct (or beam) and diffuse sun radiation strike
the collector cover, where a fraction of the energy is
reflected, transmitted and absorbed. The transmitted
energy strikes the absorber plate where a specific frac-
tion of the energy is absorbed and the other part is
reflected back to collector cover. Again the fraction of
reflected energy which comes from the bottom of col-
lector cover is absorbed by the absorber plate. The
number of reflections of radiation energy increases
below the collector cover which causes a large fraction
of energy to be absorbed by the absorber plate. Due
to the natural convection mechanism, the warm
absorber plate surface heats up the adjacent air, caus-
ing it to rise. The warm air inside the collector heats
the collector cover by mixed convection. Due to the
forced and natural convection, the energy from the
collector cover is transferred to adjacent air from its
surface and is shown in Figure 2. The tower (or)
chimney converts this high thermal energy into kin-
etic energy. The pressure drop across the turbine can
be decreased by the various frictional losses in the
chimney (the inlet and exit flow losses). As the
Figure 2. Thermal energy balance of collector.

collector wind currents pass over the turbine(s), the
active energy of the air rotates the turbine blade
which turns a generator.
Solar radiation calculations
With a particular ultimate objective to process the
beam and diffuse radiation on a tilted (or) slanted col-
lector cover surface facing due south, it is very
important to convert the estimation of direct flux
coming from the origin of the sun to an equivalent
regard identifying with the normal direction to the
surface. In the event that ‘h’ is the angle between an
occurrence light flux normal to the collector (Ibn) and
the perpendicular to a plane surface, then the propor-
tional flux coming up normal to the surface is
expressed by Ibncosh. The angle ‘h’ can be related by a
general equation to ‘/’ the latitude, ‘f’ the slope, ‘c’
the surface azimuth angle, ‘d’ the declination, and ‘xs’
is the solar hour angle.
The collector for SUT is in the shape of a cone,
with the chimney attached from the middle of the
cone. The choice of a cone structure is to allow the
dirt to slide off from the collector cover (as compared
to a horizontal collector) as well as to allow the air to
enter the chimney from all sides. The collectors ought
to be situated specifically towards the equator, facing
south in the northern hemisphere and north in the
southern hemisphere. For NIT Warangal, India the
longitude is 79 350 east and latitude / ¼ 18 000 north.
The relevant angles to be used in solar energy
resource calculations are shown in Figure 3. The
instantaneous hour angles are calculated during day
time at 60 minutes of intervals from sunset to sunrise
at NIT Warangal, India. These calculated hour angles
are used to determine the angle of incidence (h) and
solar zenith angle (hZ) on each side of the collector.
The direct (or) beam radiation (Ibeam) and diffuse
Figure 3. Solar angles on collector surface.
HEAT TRANSFER ENGINEERING 5
radiation (Idiffuse) at each interval is calculated from
the angle of incidence (h), zenith angle (hZ), tilt fac-
tors for both beam and diffuse radiation (tb and td)
and the constant values (c1, c2, and c3). From the
angle of incidence and the calculated beam radiation,
the energy transmitted through the glass cover is
determined by using Snell’s law. The net energy trans-
mitted through the glass cover is sum of the beam
radiation and diffuse radiation.
Beam radiation
The declination (d) is the point made by the line join-
ing the focuses of the sun and the earth with the pro-
jection of this line on the central plane. It emerges by
the goodness of the reality the earth pivots around the
sun which make an angle of roughly 66.5 with the
plane of its turn around the sun. The declination
angle fluctuates between þ23.45 on June 21 to 23.45
on December 21. It is zero on the two equinox days
of March 21 and September 22 [13].


360
d ¼ 23:45sin ðYD þ 284Þ (1)
365
where, YD is day of the year ¼355 (December 21st,
2016) for winter season in NIT Warangal, India. The
solar declination (d) on this date is estimated by Eq.
(1) as
23.45 .
The solar hour angle (xs) is an angular measure of
time and is equivalent to 15 per hour. It also varies
from
180 to þ180 . We adopt the convention of
measuring it from noon based on local apparent time,
being positive in the morning and negative in
the afternoon.
The hour angle at sunrise or sunset (xst) for an
inclined surface facing due south (c ¼ 0 ) [14],
 
xst ¼ cos
1
tand tanðu
fÞ (2)
where, xst is the hour angle at sunrise and sunset and
/ is the latitude (a positive number for the northern
hemisphere). The hour angle at sunrise or sunset (xst)
on December 21st is estimated as 77.2 . The xst is used
to estimate sunrise or sunset time for given region.
  

xst 60 þ 720
Sunrise time : tsunrise ¼ 15
(3)
 60 60
xst 15 þ 720
Sunset time : tsunset ¼ (4)
60
Instantaneous hour angle in day time is estimated
from,

360 ðstandardtime
12Þ
xs ¼ 6 (5)
24 hours
6 R. BALIJEPALLI ET AL.

Solar incident angle (h) on an inclined surface fac-
ing due south (c ¼ 0 ) is [13],
   
cosh ¼ sindsinðu
fÞ þ cosd cosx cosðu
fÞ
(6)
where, c is surface azimuthal angle. The solar inci-
dent angle at noon time (12:00) for the day December
21st is 11.43 . Incident angle reaches its peak value at
sunrise and sunset times and achieve a minimum
value at noon times in a sun shine day.
Solar zenith angle is estimated from,
coshZ ¼ sindsinu þ cosdcosx cos u (7)
The zenith angle at solar noon time (12:00) for the
day December 21st is 41.43 . Likewise the zenith angle
varies according to different time of intervals in a day.
Now, we estimate the solar radiation under cloud-
less skies (clear days). According to the analysis of
U.S. data, ASHRAE [13], the global radiation (IG)
available on a horizontal surface is given by,
IG ¼ IB þ ID (8)
where, IB is solar beam radiation on hour basis and
ID is solar diffuse radiation on hour basis.
Now,
IB ¼ Ibn coshZ (9)


1 þ cosf
ID ¼ c3 IBN (14)
2
The total global radiation (IG) incident on to a
sloped (or) tilted collector cover surface is given by
[13],


  c 2 

cosh 1 þ cosf
IG ¼ IB þ ID ¼ c1 ðcoshÞe Z þ c3 IBN
2
(15)
By using Eqs. (13–15), the beam, direct, and diffuse
radiations for December 21, 2016 was estimated 747.9,
103.3, and 851.2 W/m2, respectively. The total or glo-
bal radiation available in year 2016 was shown in
Figures 4 and 5. ASHRAE model [13] was used to
estimate the beam and diffuse radiation. The calcula-
tions were made based on 21st day of every month
(Year 2016) at Warangal, India. Figures 4 and 5 give
the global radiation data at 21st of every month in the
year of 2016. Summer season (April/May) gives the
maximum solar radiation (1059 W/m2) and the next
peak was observed in August month (harvest time)
and it is shown in Figure 5. Sun shining is less in the
winter time (November/December) compared to both
1200.0
Global Radiation W/m2

where, Ibn is beam radiation in the direction of the 1000.0

  c2 


rays given by Ibn ¼ c1 e coshZ and hZ is the zenith 800.0
Jan
angle. The solar diffuse radiation is defined by 600.0 Feb
Mar
ID ¼ c3 Ibn (10) 400.0
Apr
where, c1, c2, and c3 are constants. These constants 200.0 May

vary in each and every month of the year. For June

0.0
December 21st the constants c1, c2, and c3 are 1204,
0.141, and 0.103, respectively.
Time in hours
The tilt factor for beam radiation on inclined sur-
face and is denoted by the symbol tb. Figure 4. Variation of global radiation along with time for first
6 months in year 2016.
cosh sindsinðu
fÞ þ cosdcosxcosðu
fÞ
tb ¼ ¼
cos hZ sindsinu þ cosdcosx cos u 1200.0
(11)
Global Radiation W/m2

1000.0
The tilt factor td for diffuse radiation on inclined
800.0
surface and is, July

1 þ cosf 600.0 Aug

td ¼ (12) Sep
2 400.0
Oct
Now the beam radiation falls on tilted collector 200.0 Nov

cover surface is calculated from, Dec

  c2  0.0


IB ¼ c1 ðcoshÞe coshZ (13)
Time in hours
Similarly the diffuse radiation falls on tilted col- Figure 5. Variation of global radiation along with time for last
lector cover surface is estimated from, 6 months in year 2016.
 HEAT TRANSFER ENGINEERING 7

summer and harvest time. These estimated values calculated by

from theoretical correlations were compared with ðsr1 þ sr2 Þ
Meteorological department of India [14]. It was found sr ¼ (21)
2
that the normal sun shine hour of summer (April where, sr1 and sr2 are the transmissivities of the two
month) was 9.17 hours and the same in winter segments of polarization.
(December month) was 8.39 hours in the year of 2016.
1
q1
sr1 ¼ (22)
1 þ q1
Energy losses 1
q2
sr2 ¼ (23)
In this area, the loss of energy in a solar collector 1 þ q2
cover because of reflection and other heat losses are Transmissivity incurred by absorption (sa) is given
evaluated and talked about. by [13],


tc eg
Energy lost due to reflection on cover material sa ¼ exp
(24)
coshZ
At the point when a light emission going through a where, eg is extinction coefficient of the glass (m
1)
straightforward medium 1 strikes the interface isolat- and tc is thickness of the glass cover (m).
ing it from another straightforward medium 2, it is The total transmissivity of the collector cover is
reflected and refracted. The reflected beam has a less- given by; sc ¼ sa sr
ened power and has a direction in such a way that the For diffuse radiation, incident angle is considered
tilt of reflection is equivalent to the edge of occur- as 60 . Accordingly, the angle of refraction is eval-
rence. Then again, the ways of occurrence and uated by utilizing same Eq. (16).
refracted beams are identified with each other by Taking after an indistinguishable technique from
Snell’s law which expresses that [13], for beam radiation, the net transmissivity of the col-
Angle caused by refraction, lector cover for diffuse radiation is same as Eq. (23).
" # Out of the portion, s transmitted through the cover

1 sinh1
h2 ¼ sin m2  (16) of the collector, a section is consumed and a section
m1
reflected diffusively. Out of the reflected section, a
where, h1 is the incident angle, m1 is the refractive segment is transmitted through the cover system and
index of medium 1, and m2 is the refractive index of a bit reflected back to the absorber plate. The proced-
medium 2. ure of assimilation and reflection at the ground plate
The reflectivity of incident beam (qi) is given by surface goes on uncertainty; the amounts included
[13]; being progressively littler. Transmissivity absorptivity
product (sa) shows that the measure of flux assimi-
q þ qi2
qi ¼ i1 (17) lated in the absorber plate regarding the flux episode
2
on the collector cover [15].
where, qi1 and qi2 are the reflectivities of the two Transmissivity absorptivity effect for direct radi-
components of polarization. ation [13],
! sa
sin2 ðh2
h1 Þ ðsaÞbeam ¼  (25)
qi1 ¼ (18) 1
ð1
aÞqd
sin2 ðh2 þ h1 Þ
! Transmissivity absorptivity effect for diffuse radi-
tan2 ðh2
h1 Þ
qi2 ¼ (19) ation [13],
tan2 ðh2 þ h1 Þ sa
ðsaÞdiff ¼  (26)
For beam or direct radiation, the transmissivity of 1
1
aÞqd
ð
the collector cover can be received with sufficient pre- where, ap is the absorptivity value of absorber plate
cision by considering reflection–refraction and assimi- and qd is the diffuse reflectivity of the collector

lation independently and is given by [13], cover ðsc Þbeam
ðsc Þdiff :
sc ¼ s a s r (20) The total radiation assimilated by the absorber
plate is [13];
where, sa is the transmissivity gained by considering
only absorption and sr is the transmissivity obtained  
IA ¼ ðIB ÞðsaÞbeam þ ðID ÞðsaÞdiff (27)
by considering only reflection and refraction. sr is
8 R. BALIJEPALLI ET AL.

The net surface area of the collector cover is esti- and plate. The collector resistance is determined with
mated by: the help of linearized radiative exchange with the sky


2 and the wind related losses. Top loss coefficient is cal-
p RC
ð
Acoll ¼ 4 Þ hs (28) culated using collector resistance and the resistance
360 cos30
between the collector cover and absorber plate. The
where, RC is collector plate radius and hs is central rate of energy lost to atmosphere per m2 of collector
angle of sector (90 ). surface area is computed. Finally net available energy
The hypothetical solar power transmitted through inside the collector is estimated by the difference
collector cover material is estimated by, among energy reached to the collector and other heat
Eth ¼ ðAcoll ÞðIG Þ (29) and wind losses. The linearized radiation coefficient is
given by [13]:
The transmitted power absorbed by the absorber  
plate is, rðTP þ Tcoll Þ TP 2 þ Tc 2
hL ¼   (32)
EP ¼ ðAP ÞðIA Þ (30) 1
eP þ 1
ec
1
where, AP is area of the absorber plate.
where, r is Stephan-Boltzmann constant, TP is
Average sunshine hours available on December 21,
absorber plate temperature, TC is collector cover tem-
2016 in Hyderabad [14], (Sh) ¼ 8.39h.
perature, eP is absorber plate emissivity, and ec is col-
The total theoretical energy absorbed by plate on
lector cover emissivity. The collector absorber plate
December 21, 2016 is,
temperature is considered as 80  C and the ambient
EA ¼ EP Sh (31) temperature as 30  C.
Transmissivity estimations of solar collector cover The collector cover temperature is chosen as 35  C
are performed using Eqs. (19–31) and are tabulated (i.e. between the ambient and the absorber plate tem-
in Table 1. peratures). The convective heat transfer coefficient hc
[13] is given by,



Heat losses s gDT
hc ¼ ð0:06
0:017Þ kL3 (33)
90 TA  2
The resistance between the collector cover and
absorber plate is computed by utilizing radiative and where, k is the thermal conductivity of air, L is the
convective heat transfer coefficients between cover distance between the absorber plate and the collector,
Table 1. Transmissivity estimations of solar collector cover.
Parameter Value
Beam (or) direct radiation on hourly basis (IB) 747.9 W/m2
Diffuse radiation on hourly basis (ID) 103.3 W/m2
Global radiation on hourly basis (IG) 851.2 W/m2
Refractive index of glass relative to the air (m2/m1) 1.526
Glass extinction coefficient (eg) 15 m
1
Glass cover thickness (tc) 5 mm
Beam Diffuse
Reflectivity of first component of polarization (qi1) 0.046 0.185
Reflectivity of second component of polarization (qi2) 0.041 0.001
Incidence angle of sun light (h1) 11.43 60
Angle caused by refraction (h2) 7.46 34.58
Reflectivity of incident beam of light (qi) 0.043 0.093
Transmitivity of first factor of polarization (sr1) 0.913 0.687
Transmitivity of second factor of polarization (sr2) 0.921 0.997
Transmissivity by conceiving reflection and refraction (sr) 0.917 0.842
Transmissivity by conceiving absorption only (sa) 0.999 0.999
Net transmissivity through collector cover (sc) 0.917 0.842
Absorptivity value of copper plate (ap) 0.94
Diffuse reflectivity of the cover system (qd) 0.1579
Transmissivity absorptivity product for beam radiation, (sa)beam 0.870
Transmissivity absorptivity product for diffuse radiation, (sa)diff 0.799
The total radiation assimilated by the absorber plate (IA) 733.22 W/m2
The net surface area of the collector cover (Acoll) 12.831 m2
The hypothetical radiant power transmitted through collector cover (Eth) 10921.7 W
The transmitted power absorbed by the absorber plate (EP) 7054.4 W
Average sunshine hours available on December 21, 2016 in Hyderabad. (nearest weather station to NIT Warangal) [15] 8.39 h
The total theoretical energy absorbed by plate on December 21, 2016 (EA) 59186.5Wh (or) 6151.7Wh/m2
 HEAT TRANSFER ENGINEERING 9

 is kinematic viscosity of air, and DT is temperature Table 2. Input and estimated parameters of heat loss
difference between plate and air. calculations.
Resistance between the collector and absorber Parameter Value
Temperature of the absorber plate (TP) 80  C
plate is, Hot air temperature at chimney base (Th) 40  C
Temperature of the collector cover (Tc) 35  C
1 30  C
R1 ¼ (34) Ambient or air temperature (Ta)
fhL þ hc g Emissivity of the copper plate (eP) 0.8
Emissivity of the collector cover (eC) 0.9
Stephan-Boltzmann constant (r) 5.6  10
8 W/m2K4
Wind loss coefficient is given by, Thermal conductivity of air (k) 0.026 W/m.K
Distance between copper plate 0.06 m
hw ¼ 5:7 þ ð3:8 VÞ (35) and collector (L)
kinematic viscosity of the air (t) 1.5  10
5 m2/s
where, V is average wind speed at 1 m height in NIT Temperature difference between 50  C
absorber plate and air (DT)
Warangal, India. Average wind speed (V) 2.0 m/s
Sky temperature is, Linearized radiation coefficient (hL) 6.04 W/m2.K
Convective heat transfer coefficient (hc) 0.04 W/m2.K
3 Wind loss coefficient (hw) 15.2 W/m2.K
Tsky ¼ ð0:0552ÞðTa Þ2 (36) Radiative heat transfer coefficient (hr) 18.52 W/m2.K
Resistance between the collector 0.16 K/W
The radiative heat transfer coefficient [13] refer- and absorber plate (R1)
Sky temperature (Tsky) 18.14  C
enced to the air temperature can be estimated from, Collector resistance (R2) 0.03 K/W

  2 
T
T  Overall heat loss coefficient (Uo)

Area of the absorber plate (AP)
5.15 W/m2.K
9.621 m2
c sky
hr ¼ reg Tc þ Tsky Tc þ Tsky 2
(37) Rate of energy loss (QL) 2479.5 W
Tc
Ta Useful energy available (QU) 4575 W
Efficiency of the collector (gcoll) 41.89 %
Collector resistance is given by, The total theoretical energy absorbed 59186.5 Wh
by plate on October 21, 2016 (EA)
1 Energy lost through the collector 18100.4 Wh
R2 ¼ (38) during sunshine hours in a day (Elost)
hr þ hw Useful energy (E) 41086.1Wh

Therefore, the overall loss coefficient (Uo) can be

estimated from,
Solar chimney (or) tower
1
Uo ¼ (39) In industries, chimneys are made of concrete and
R1 þ R2
cement. It may be designed as straight vertical, diver-
The rate of energy loss is estimated as, gent and sometimes convergent-divergent shapes.
QL ¼ Uo Acoll ðTP
Ta Þ (40) Each has its own characters and enhances the air flow
and creates pressure difference. In this SUT plant,
Useful energy available is calculated by, since it is a prototype, it is needed to find the material
having the following essential characteristics such as
QU ¼ EP
QL (41)
light weight, heavy wind withstand characteristics cap-
Energy lost per day can be calculated based on the ability, moisture resistant, and structurally strong in
rate of energy loss per hour of a day (8.39 h) and it is, nature. For achieving this, there were different materi-
als picked and their glass transition temperature, melt-
Elost ¼ Sh QL (42) ing temperature, density, thermal conductivity and
specific heat were picked and analyzed. Since it is
The useful energy available during sunshine hours
solar heating application, polycarbonate material is
in a day per m2 of base area is,
selected to make this prototype of SUT plant.
E ¼ EA
Elost (43) The diameter of the chimney (Dch) is considered
as 0.6 m. In order to reduce the frictional and other
The efficiency of the collector is, heat losses, the chimney height should be ten times
QU greater than the chimney diameter. Therefore, the
gcoll ¼ (44) chimney height of 6 m is selected for this system. Let
Eth
the ambient temperature (Ta) be 30  C and the hot
The input parameters and heat loss estimations are air temperature (Th) be 40  C. The maximum air vel-
performed using Eqs. (32–44) and are tabulated ocity [8] is estimated (when there is no turbine
in Table 2. inside) using,
10 R. BALIJEPALLI ET AL.

Table 3. Chimney materials and properties [8, 10].

Thermosetting Glass transition Melting Thermal Conductivity Density Specific heat
Plastic Material temperature ( C) temperature ( C) (W/m K) (kg/m3) (kJ/kg K)
Polyvinylchloride 87 212 0.14–0.28 1467 0.9
(rigid PVC)
Nylon 6,6 100 265 0.24–0.3 1140 0.0017
Polycarbonate 150 265 0.19–0.22 1200 1.17
Polyester 73 265 – 1370 1.3–1.5
Polyethylene
90 137 – 970 1.25
Polypropylene
14 176 – 905 1.92
Poly tetra fluroethylene
90 327 0.25 2200 1.172


Ta Table 4. Input and estimated parameters of chimney.
Vmax ¼ 冑2gHch 1
(45)
Th Parameter Value
Absorber plate temperature (TP) 80  C
where, g is acceleration due to gravity. Ambient or air temperature (Ta) 30  C
Chimney internal surface area is, Hot air temperature (Th) 40  C

 Specific heat of air (Cp, air) 1.005 kJ/kg K
p 2 Chimney diameter (Dch) 0.6 m
Ach ¼ D (46) Chimney height (Hch) 6m
4 ch Density of air at chimney base (qair) 1.005 kg/m3
Maximum air velocity (Vmax) 1.9 m/s
Air mass flow rate through the chimney is, Chimney surface area (Ach) 0.2827 m2
Air mass flow rate (mair) 0.55 kg/s
mair ¼ qair Vmax Ach (47) Heat transfer rate of air (Qair) 4.574 kW
Required energy for 12 h operation (Ech) 54.9 kWh
where, qair is air density at exit of collector. Required collector base area (AR.C) 8.924 m2
Air heat transfer rate inside the collector is given Pressure drop across the turbine in chimney (DPt) 0.538 N/m2
Maximum theoretical power output of a turbine (Pth) 0.289 W
by, Efficiency of the turbine (t) [9] 66.6 %
Actual power output of a turbine (Pact) 0.257 W
Qair ¼ mair Cp;air DT (48) Efficiency of the chimney (ch) 0.0193 %
Overall efficiency of the plant (go) 0.00192 %
where, Cp,air is specific heat of air and DT is tem-
perature difference of air inside and outside collector.
PTotal gHch
From Eqs. (30) and (48), the hot air temperature is gch ¼ ¼ (53)
estimated as 40  C. Qair Cp;air Th
The amount of energy needed for 12 h continuous The height and temperature are crucial factors to
operation is, decide chimney efficiency. Specific heat of air at nor-
Ech ¼ 12 Qair (49) mal room temperature is 1.005 kJ/kg K and Th will
always be above 273 K (i.e. the denominator of the effi-
Required base surface area of solar collector is
ciency equation is in the order of 273,000 or above).
approximated based on the energy needed for 12 h
For the efficiency to be expanded to a figure near
continuous operation and it is,
100%, the height of the chimney must be in the order
Ech of 273000/9.81 ¼ 27828 m. This is three times higher
Areq ¼ (50)
EP than the height of Mount Everest. Enhancing the
Pressure difference between chimney base and sur- height of chimney to give rise moderate air speed is
roundings [16] is estimated from, excessively costly and will exhibit significant engineer-
ing challenges. The efficiency of the chimney changes
DPt ¼ 0:00353 gHch
( !
) with height at a consistent tower or chimney tempera-


pIG gcoll R2c gHch c1 Hch ture of 353 K. The examination demonstrates that in

þ
Cp;air mair 2Cp;air 2 spite of the fact that the tower temperature is over the
atmospheric temperature, it ought to be kept as low as
(51)
conceivable as Th shows up in the denominator of the
where, c1 is lapse rate of ambient temperature. efficiency equation. The overall efficiency (go) of the
The maximum power production of an ideal tur- solar chimney power plant [16] can be calculated from,
bine [16] is,
Pact
Pth ¼ ðDPt ÞVmax Ach (52) go ¼ (54)
pIG R2c
Therefore the efficiency of the chimney is where, Pact ¼ Pth gt , Pact is the actual power output of
computed from [8], the turbine and gt is the efficiency of the turbine.
 HEAT TRANSFER ENGINEERING 11

All the input and estimated parameters of chimney Turbine blade profile design
are mentioned in Table 4.
Turbine rotor blades are made to move around the
less dense wind flow through a selected angle with
Solar wind turbine negligible frictional losses. The primary load acts on
The turbine blade material selection and design part rotor blade is bending force because of upward move-
are explained in this section. ment of air which leads to extreme bending stress at
root section of the blade. Normally turbine blade pro-
Turbine blade selection files can be classified as [18]: NACA 4 digit series,
NACA 5 digit series, and NACA 6 digit series.
There are various turbine blade materials selected and Horizontal axis wind turbines (HAWT) are lift type
their properties analyzed (Table 5). and vertical axis wind turbines (VAWT) are drag type
Turbine blades have verifiably been made of wood wind turbines. Lift type wind turbines can produce
however not utilized every now and again as a result huge power rather than the drag type ones. Because
of its sensibility to dampness (or) moisture and low of this reason lift type HAWT is selected for this
stiffness makes it hard to confine the flexible deflec- study. A starting motor is not required for the
tions for extensive turbine blades. Steel or nickel alloy HAWT to catch up the operational speed of the rotor.
steel blades have greater inertia cushioned the adjust- It only needs area swept by the rotor is facing normal
ments in revolution speed and in this manner made to the upstream wind. A NACA0012 blade profile was
power yield more steady. Aluminum is one of the selected for the reason that it permits flexibility during
ductile and well heat conductor materials. Aluminum manufacturing due to straight high pressure side.
material has the properties of light in weight, weaker
and less stiff than steel [17]. The fibers and framework
materials like vinyl esters, epoxies and polyesters and
so on, are joined in to composites. These composites
have great properties, such as thermal, chemical, and
mechanical properties.
Physical and mechanical characteristics of glass and
fiber composites are much noticeable among other
composites. Therefore, small scale or large scale tur-
bine blades are manufactured by this glass and fiber
composites. Electrical grade glass (E-glass) is another
material which has higher strength and fiber charac-
teristics. It can be derived from woven texture and
fortifying mat.
Other important characteristics of turbine blade
materials are low density, moisture resistant, low Figure 6. Velocities and angles.
weight, and high stiffness. Carbon fiber composites
give similar nature of low weight and density and
higher moisture resistivity. Therefore, this material
8.00
was suggested by Jureczko et al. [17] for small scale
7.00
wind turbines. Different turbine material properties
6.00
are listed in Table 5.
5.00
4.00
Table 5. Turbine blade materials and properties. Tip speed ratio

3.00
Thermo – Mechanical Properties [17] Optimal chord length (m)

2.00 Solidity ratio

Turbine blade Strength Stiffness Energy/Stiffness Energy/Strengtnh
material (MPa) (GPa) (J/Nm) (kJ/Nm) 1.00
Aluminum 300 70 11.4 2.67 0.00
Steel (Gr.43) 275 210 2.4 1.87 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
GFRP (UD Glass) 300 40 6.3 0.83 Blade segment Radius (m)
CFRP (UD Carbon) 900 125 4.0 0.56
Wood 120 16 0.24 0.032 Figure 7. Variation of tip speed ratio, optimal chord length,
Bamboo 180 25 0.15 0.021 and solidity ratio with different blade segment radius.
12 R. BALIJEPALLI ET AL.

Various velocities associated with turbine and the cor- 0.085, 0.128, 0.171, 0.213, and 0.256 m from the hub.
responding angles are represented in Figure 6. The effect of several design factors such as tip speed
The main parameters required for the design of ratio, optimal chord length, solidity ratio, lift force
turbine blade are quantity of blades (n), angle of and drag force and various wind angles such as rela-
attack and lift coefficient which are 3, 7 , and 0.9, tive wind angle (/) and blade pitch angle (b) are esti-
respectively. The turbine blade is partitioned with mated at each segment of the blade from root to the
number of segments in order to evaluate the various tip and are shown in Figures 7, 8, and 9. From
wind velocities, angles, forces acting on blade and Figure 7, it is observed that optimal chord length of
power produced. Blade element momentum theory is the blade is achieved at relative radius (r/R) of 0.3 and
used to find out the blade design parameters and also minimum chord length is possible at higher tip
wind angles. The first segment of the blade is decided speed ratio which leads to narrow blade structure.
at a radius (r) of 0.042 m from the hub. Remaining In case of upstream wind velocity of 2 m/s, lift force
segments of the blade are partitioned at a radius of was not enough to turn the blades and highest possible
power generation (P) at this condition is 0.012 W.
0.14 Optimal chord length was attained at second segment
0.12 of the blade. Reduction of the (/) and (b) between two
Power in W
0.10
adjacent blade segments is more in this low wind vel-
Lift Force in N
ocity condition (2 m/s). Higher tip speed ratios are also
0.08
Drag Force in N possible at these low wind velocities which results lower
0.06 chord length of the blade leads to narrow blade profile.
0.04 This succeeds to less use of blade material and mean-
0.02 while it reduces the manufacturing cost. High tip speed
ratio causes a rotor blade with a low solidity ratio.
0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00
Tip speed ratio Comparison with existed models of SUT
Figure 8. Variation of power, lift force, and drag force with tip
speed ratio. It is very important to validate the analytical results
with the similar type of existing [19–23] small scale
60.0
prototype SUT. Table 6 provides information about
reduced scale models of SUT and more or less all the
50.0 Relative wind angle (°)
Blade pitch angle (°)
design parameters are similar to our calculated ones.
40.0
Conclusions
30.0
An SUT power plant was designed with the chimney
20.0
diameter of 0.6 m and collector diameter of 3.5 m. Solar
10.0 radiation calculations were made as per the dimensions
of the design parameters. Solar radiation falls on the
0.0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 collector was estimated and it was 878.3 W/m2.
Blade Segment Radius (m) Maximum air velocity noticed inside the chimney was
Figure 9. Variation of pitch and wind angles with different 1.9 m/s. The estimated power output was 0.29 W.
blade segment radius. Pressure gradient across the turbine was 0.54 N/m2.

Table 6. Comparison of design parameters with existed reduced scale SUTs.

Pasumarthi and Ayadi Mehran Zhou Present
Authors Parameters Sherif [19] et al. [20] Lal et al. [21] et al. [22] et al. [23] study
Chimney Height (m) 7.92 3 8 2 8.8 6
Chimney Diameter (m) 0.61 0.16 0.2032 0.2 0.3 0.6
Collector Dia / Area (m/m2) 9.51 m 2.75 m 12-m/113-m2 3m 10 3.5
Power (W) 4.5 0.1 1–5 0.02 2 0.29
Temperature difference ( C) 13.9 10 12.2 16 24.1 10
Pressure drop (N/m2) 2.5 0.54
Maximum air velocity (m/sec) 2 1.9 6 1.3 2.13 1.94
Mass flow rate (kg/s) 1.5 0.3 0.55
Solar radiation (W/m2) 700–1200 1000 820 851–1060
Chimney efficiency (%) 0.0193
Overall efficiency (%) 0.0013 0.02 0.0015

Heat loss calculations inside the setup were made
and based on that linearized radiation, wind loss,
radiative heat transfer and convective heat transfer
coefficients were estimated and they were 6.04, 15.2,
18.52, and 0.04 W/m2K, respectively. Efficiency of the
collector was estimated as 41.89%.
Various chimney materials were picked and analyzed
based on their physical and thermal properties and
finally polycarbonate material was suggested. Based on
the input parameters of chimney, efficiency of the chim-
ney and overall efficiency of the setup were estimated
and they were 0.0193 and 0.00192%, respectively.
Design and performance parameters of SUT plant
were estimated and they were compared to existing
literature. It was found that they were in reasonable
agreement. This extensive analysis of SUT power plant
had more than 150 input, design and performance
parameters. All the values were estimated, thoroughly
checked and tabulated.
Acknowledgment
Authors acknowledge the support received by way of cover
reading from Dr. M.R. Vishwanathan, Assistant Professor of
English, Humanities and Social Science Department, NIT
Warangal, India.
Funding
The authors acknowledge the financial support provided by
(i) Science &Engineering Research Board (SERB),
Department of Science and Technology (DST), New Delhi -
110 070, India, Grant No. File Number: EEQ/2016/000111
and (ii) Center of Excellence (CoE) under TEQIP – II,
National Institute of Technology Warangal, Warangal,
India, Ref. No: TEQIP/CoE/2016.
Notes on Contributors
Ramakrishna Balijepalli is a Ph.D. student
at National Institute of Technology
Warangal, India, under the supervision of
Dr. V. P. Chandramohan and Co-
Supervision of Dr. K. Kirankumar.
He received B.Tech. in Mechanical
Engineering from Vignan’s Engineering
College in 2007 and M. Tech. in Thermal Science and
Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
in 2009. He is currently doing research on experimental and
numerical investigation of solar updraft tower.
V. P. Chandramohan is Associate
Professor of Mechanical Engineering at
National Institute of Technology Warangal,
India. He received his M.E. degree from
Annamalai University, Tamilnadu in 2002
and his Ph.D. degree from Indian Institute
of Technology Delhi, New Delhi in 2012.
He has been teaching at National Institute of Technology
HEAT TRANSFER ENGINEERING 13
Warangal since 2013. His research contributions have been
in the field of computational fluid dynamics, convection and
conduction heat transfer, drying and simultaneous solution
of heat and mass transfer, solar energy, alternative fuels and
hydrogen fuel cell. He is currently working on solar drier and
also solar updraft tower for electricity generation.
K. Kirankumar is Associate Professor of
Mechanical Engineering at National
Institute of Technology Warangal, India.
He received his M. Tech. degree from
Jawaharlal Nehru Technological
University, Hyderabad and his Ph.D.
degree from Indian Institute of
Technology Kharagpur, India. He has been teaching at
National Institute of Technology Warangal since 2012. His
research contributions have been in the field of thermal
engineering, heat transfer, nanofluids, refrigeration and
air-conditioning, computational fluid dynamics and non-
conventional energy sources.
References
[1] T. B. Johansson, K. Henry, K. N. R. Amulya, and
H. W. Robert, Renewable Energy: Sources for Fuels
and Electricity. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Island
Press, 1992, p. 1160.
[2] W. Haaf, K. Freidrich, G. Mayr, and J. Schlaich,
“Solar chimneys part 1: principle and construction of
the pilot plant in manzanares,” Int. J. Solar Energy,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 3–20, 1983. DOI: 10.1080/0142591
8308909911.
[3] W. Haaf, “Solar chimneys part 2: principle and
construction of the pilot plant in manzanares,” Int.
J. Solar Energy, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 141–161, 1984.
DOI: 10.1080/01425918408909921.
[4] X. P. Zhou, F. Wang, and R. M. Ochieng, “A review
of solar chimney power technology,” Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev., vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 2315–2338, Oct. 2010.
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2010.04.018.
[5] J. P. Pretorius, and D. G. Kr€oger, “Critical evaluation
of solar chimney power plant performance,” Solar
Energy, vol. 80, no. 5, pp. 535–544, 2006. DOI:
10.1016/j.solener.2005.04.001.
[6] X. Zhou and J. Yang, “A novel solar thermal
power plant with floating chimney stiffened onto a
mountain side and potential of the power generation
in China’s deserts,” Heat Transfer Eng., vol. 30,
no. 5, pp. 400–407, 2009. DOI: 10.1080/0145763080
2414813
[7] Y. Tian and C. Y. Zhao, “A review of solar collectors
and thermal energy storage in solar thermal
applications,” Appl. Energy, vol. 104, pp. 538–553,
Apr. 2013. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.11.051.
[8] J. Schlaich, R. Bergermann, W. Schiel, and G.
Weinrebe, “Design of commercial solar updraft
tower systems-utilization of solar induced convective
flows for power generation,” ASME J. Solar Energy
Eng., vol. 127, no. 1, pp. 117–124, Feb. 2005. DOI:
10.1115/1.1823493.
[9] C. B. Maia, A. G. Ferreira, R. M. Valle, and M. F. B.
Cortez, “Analysis of the air flow in a prototype of a
14 R. BALIJEPALLI ET AL.
solar chimney drier,” Heat Transfer Eng., vol. 30,
no. 5, pp. 393–399, 2009. DOI: 10.1080/0145763080
2414797
[10] T. W. Von Backstr€om and A. J. Gannon, “Solar
chimney turbine performance,” ASME J. Solar
Energy Eng., vol. 125, no. 1, pp. 101–106, Jan. 2003.
DOI: 10.1115/1.1530195.
[11] X. Zxou, J. Yang, B. Xiao, G. Hou, and W. U.
Yingying, “Numerical investigation of a compressible
flow through a solar chimney,” Heat Transfer Eng.,
vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 670–676, 2009. DOI: 10.1080/
01457630802659961.
[12] M. Khoukhi, S. Maruyama, A. Komiya, and M.
Behnia, “Flat plate solar collector performance with
coated and uncoated glass cover,” Heat Transfer
Eng., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 46–53, Aug. 2006. DOI:
10.1080/01457630500343009
[13] S. P. Sukhatme and J. K. Nayak, Solar Energy-
Principles of Thermal Collection and Storage. 3rd ed.,
New Delhi, India: Tata McGraw Hill Education
Private Limited, 2008.
[14] A. P. Tyagi, Solar Radiant Energy over India, India
Meteorological Department. Ministry of Earth
Sciences, Government of India, 2016, pp. 1–4179.
[15] J. Freeman, K. Hellgardt, and N. M. Christos, “An
assessment of solar thermal collector designs for
small scale combined heating and power applications
in the United Kingdom,” Heat Transfer Eng., vol. 36,
no. 14-15, pp. 1332–1347, 2015. DOI: 10.1080/
01457632.2015.995037
[16] X. Zhou, J. Yang, B. Xiao, G. Hou, and F. Xing,
“Analysis of chimney height for solar chimney power
plant,” Appl. Thermal Eng., vol. 29, no. 1, pp.
178–185, Jan. 2009. DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.
2008.02.014.
[17] M. Jureczko, M. Pawlak, and A. Mezyk,
“Optimisation of wind turbine blades,” J. Mater.
Process. Technol., vol. 167, no. 2-3, pp. 463–471,
2005. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.06.055.
[18] I. H. Abbott, “Airfoils, Evolution of Aircraft Wing
Design,” AIAA Dayton Section Symposium, AIAA
Paper # 80-3033, Mar. 1980. DOI: 10.2514/
MEAWD80
[19] N. Pasumarthi and S. A. Sherif, “Experimental and
theoretical performance of a demonstration solar
chimney Model - Part II: Experimental and theoret-
ical results and economic analysis,” Int. J. Energy
Res., vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 443–461, Apr. 1998. DOI:
10.1002/(SICI)1099-114X(199804)22:5<443::AID-ER3
81>3.0.CO;2-V
[20] A. Ayadi, Z. Driss, A. Bouabidi, and M. S. Abid,
“Experimental and numerical study of the impact of
the collector roof inclination on the performance
of a solar chimney power plant,” Energy Build.,
vol. 139, pp. 263–276, Mar. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.
enbuild.2017.01.047.
[21] S. Lal, S. C. Kaushik, and R. Hans, “Experimental
investigation and CFD simulation studies of a
laboratory scale solar chimney for generation,”
Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess., vol. 13, pp. 13–22,
Feb. 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.seta.2015.11.005.
[22] G. Mehran, A. Kasaeian, and G. Mehrdad,
“Experimental study of geometrical and climate
effects on the performance of a small solar chimney,”
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 43, pp. 425–431,
Mar. 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.11.068.
[23] X. Zhou, Y. Yang, B. Xiao, and G. Hou,
“Experimental study of temperature field in a solar
chimney power setup,” Appl. Thermal Eng., vol. 27,
no. 11-12, pp. 2044–2050, Aug., 2007. DOI: 10.1016/
j.applthermaleng.2006.12.007.