Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827

www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

Wind effect on the performance of solid particle solar receivers

with and without the protection of an aerowindow
Taide Tan a, Yitung Chen a,*, Zhuoqi Chen a, Nathan Siegel b, Gregory J. Kolb b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA
b
Solar Systems Department, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM 87123, USA

Received 30 June 2008; received in revised form 27 March 2009; accepted 21 June 2009
Available online 6 August 2009

Communicated by: Associate Editor Robert Pitz-Paal

Abstract

The wind conditions affect the performance of a solid particle solar receiver (SPSR) by convection heat transfer through the existing
open aperture. Aerowindows have the potential of increasing the efficiency of an SPSR. In the present paper, the wind effect on the per-
formance of an SPSR is investigated numerically with and without the protection of an aerowindow. The independence of the calculating
domain in a wind field has been studied in order to select a proper domain for the numerical simulation. The cavity thermal efficiencies
and the exiting temperature of the solid particles have been calculated and analyzed for different wind conditions. The numerical inves-
tigation of the SPSRs’ performance can provide a guide in optimizing the prototype design, finding out the suitable working condition
and proposing efficiency enhancing techniques for SPSRs.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Solid particle; Solar receiver; Radiation; Wind; Air jet; Aerowindow

1. Introduction
An SPSR is a direct absorption central receiver that uses
solid particles enclosed in a cavity to absorb concentrated
solar radiation. The purpose of the research on SPSRs is
to design an efficient receiver as an important part in a
water-splitting (WS) thermo-chemical (TC) process to pro-
duce hydrogen, which is a promising energy carrier for the
future energy supplies. An SPSR heats ceramic particles
that serve as a heat transfer and storage medium or as a sub-
strate on which chemical reaction may be performed
directly in TC processes (Hruby, 1986; Evans et al., 1987).
An SPSR has many favorable characteristics compared to
*
Corresponding author. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Uni-
versity of Nevada Las Vegas, 4505 Maryland Parkway, P.O. Box 454027,
Las Vegas, NV 89154-4027, USA. Tel.: +1 702 895 1202; fax: +1 702 895
4922.
E-mail address: uuchen@nscee.edu (Y. Chen).
other solar receivers. For example, the solid particles absorb
the concentrated solar flux directly and the particles them-
selves serve as the storage medium in an SPSR, by which
a high temperature can be obtained since a fluid conduit,
additional piping and heat exchanger equipment are not
necessary (Hruby, 1986). However, the existing open aper-
ture lowers the overall efficiency by convection heat transfer
(Meier, 1999). The convective heat loss from the aperture
may be reduced by an aerowindow (Siegel et al., 2007; Taus-
sig, 1984). Aerodynamic windows consist of a transparent
gas stream, which is injected from an air jet, across the recei-
ver aperture to isolate its interior from the surrounding
atmosphere (Siegel et al., 2007; Taussig, 1984).
The wind conditions may have important effect on the
performance of SPSRs since an SPSR is usually mounted
atop a tower to capture the focused solar energy from a
field of heliostats. The solid particles are lifted to the top
of the SPSR and then fall as a cloud or curtain through
the receiver where they are irradiated directly by concen-

0038-092X/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2009.06.014
1816 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827
Nomenclature
CD drag coefficient
Cp specific heat capacity (J/kg-K)
dp particle diameter
Nu the Nusselt number
Ið~ s0 Þ
r;~ total intensity
L approaching length of the domain
p pressure
p
Q integrated absorption energy gain of the parti-
cles
s
Q total incident solar energy
QL_Conv convection heat loss
QL_Rad radiation heat loss
~
r position vector
~
s direction vector
S side space of the studied domain
ui velocity of air flow (m/s)
up,i particle velocity
V velocity
Vwind wind velocity
Vaj air jet velocity
trated sunlight passing through the aperture of the SPSR.
Martin and Vitko (1982) studied the falling solid particles,
as a pioneering work, in a solar central receiver at Sandia
National Laboratories (SNL). The particle temperature
and the efficiency of energy absorption of the receiver have
been investigated by Evans et al. (1985, 1987) utilizing
numerical models. Using computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) techniques, the performance of a solar falling parti-
cle reactor in a pilot plant was investigated by Meier
(1999). The models, however, were limited to two-dimen-
sional cases due to a limitation in computational resources
and most of these models have not considered the interac-
tion between the particles and the flow inside the SPSR.
The 3D numerical model has been built by Chen et al.
(2007) and the impact of the particle size and other operat-
ing conditions on the performance of the SPSR have been
studied numerically. However, the 3D study has been con-
fined in the receiver only, without considering the impact of
the surrounding environments and the wind. In fact, the
heat exchange between the air inside the cavity and the
environment is very important, especially when a wind field
is present. To the best of our knowledge, no detailed study
has been done on the performance of the SPSR considering
the wind effect and the protection of an aerowindow. It is
necessary to investigate systematically the heat loss from
the particles to the air in the receiver and from the receiver
to the atmosphere, especially with the presence of wind.
In the present paper, the wind effect on the performance of
an SPSR is investigated numerically. The physical, mathe-
matical, and numerical models are presented. For the first
time, the independence of the calculating domain is studied
in order to select a proper domain for the numerical simula-
Rep relative particle Reynolds number
T temperature
T mean temperature
Tp particle temperature
Tp average particle temperature
Tp_max maximum particle temperature
TR radiation temperature
X, Y, Z coordinates
Greek symbols
a wind attacking angle on plane of XOZ
b wind attacking angle on plane of YOZ
k wavelength
r Stefan–Boltzmann constant
ep particle emissivity,
q density
qp density of particle
l viscosity
g cavity efficiency
tion of the performance of an SPSR. In order to evaluate the
wind effect on the performance of the receiver, different wind
conditions, including wind speeds and wind blowing direc-
tions, are simulated. The protection of an aerowindow on
the performance of an SPSR is investigated in various wind
fields and the results are compared with the cases without an
air jet. The purpose of the performance investigation of an
SPSR is to provide a guide in optimizing the prototype
design, finding out the suitable working conditions and pro-
posing efficiency enhancing techniques for SPSRs.
2. Physics model
A conceptual design of an SPSR has been proposed for
experiments and numerical studies at SNL. The schematic of
the proposed SPSR design is shown in Fig. 1, which has a
dimension of 2  1.58  3 m with an aperture 1.50  1.50 m.
The working solid particle is called CARBO-HSP, a commer-
cial product from CARBO Ceramics, which contains mainly
bauxite and about 7% iron oxide (Chen et al., 2007). The parti-
cles are assumed to be spherical in shape (sphericity of 0.9).
Solar energy is concentrated by heliostats on the ground and
directed to the receiver through the aperture. The solid particles
are fed from the top of the receiver. In order to enhance the per-
formance of an SPSR, an air jet is added on the top of the aper-
ture. The air jet injects air to form an aerowindow and separate
the hot interior air with the cold surrounding environment. The
aerodynamic behaviors of the particles will be studied consider-
ing the wind effect, the air jet flow, the air flow inside the receiver
induced by the falling of particles, by the wind, by the air jet
flow, and by the temperature difference inside the receiver.
The thermal interactions include the particle–particle radiation,
 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827
Fig. 1. A schematic of an SPSR, the domain for CFD simulation, and the
wind field.
the particle–wall radiation, the particle–air convection, and the
air–wall convection, etc.
3. Mathematical model
The air flow inside the SPSR can be influenced by drag
forces, the buoyancy force inside the SPSR and convective
heat transfer in the vicinity of the particles because of the
interaction with the particles. The particle volume fraction
in the SPSR has been found to be less than 0.1% (Chen
et al., 2007; Hruby and Burolla, 1984). Therefore, the col-
lisions between particles are negligible. The two-way cou-
pled Euler–Lagrange method, which includes the
exchange of heat and momentum between the gas phase
and the solid phase, is used to simulate the gas-particle flow
in this paper.
With the typical operating conditions of the receiver, the
characteristic Reynolds numbers within and out of the
receiver are calculated to be larger than 1.0  105. There-
fore, a turbulent flow is expected within and out of the
receiver. The time-averaged governing equations for con-
servation of gas phase mass, momentum, and energy can
be found from the Refs. by Chen et al. (2007) and the user
manual from Fluent Inc. (2005). A realizable k–e model is
used for closing the turbulent Navier–Stokes equation sys-
tem. Compared with the standard k–e model, the realizable
k–e model is able to provide superior performance for flows
involving rotation, boundary layers under strong adverse
pressure gradients, separation and recirculation (including
flows over obstacles, Kim et al., 1997; Shih et al., 1995).
The details of the realizable k–e model have been given in
Refs. (Chen et al., 2007; Fluent Inc., 2005), together with
the differences with the standard k–e model and the advan-
tages of the realizable k–e model.
By integrating the force balance on the particle, the tra-
jectory of the particles can be predicted in a Lagrangian
1817
reference frame. This force balance equates the particle
inertia with the forces acting on the particle, and can be
written as,
dup;i 18l C D Rep gi ðqp  qÞ
¼ 2
ðui  up;i Þ þ ð1Þ
dt qp d p 24 qp
where the relative Reynolds number Rep can be obtained
by,
qd p jup;i  uj
Rep ¼ ð2Þ
l
The suitable empirical equation for the drag coefficient
for the particles in the solar receiver is proposed by Clift
et al. (1978),
24
CD ¼ ð1 þ 0:15Re2=3
p Þ ð3Þ
Rep
The effect of the pressure gradient and particle accelera-
tion on drag coefficient can be neglected since the material
density ratio between particle and air is larger than 103.
The energy equation for the particle is given by,
qp cp pd 3p dT p
¼ Nukpd p ðT  T p Þ þ pd 2 ep rðT 4R  T 4p Þ ð4Þ
6 dt
In order to predict the interaction of an incident radia-
tion field with the falling particle curtain and receiver wall
accurately, the discrete ordinate method with a solar ray
tracing model is used to calculate the radiation field inside
the receiver. The radiative transfer governing equation for
the spectral intensity I k ð~ s0 Þ of an absorbing, emitting, and
r;~
scattering medium, at position ~ r in the direction ~
s can be
found from Refs. (Chen et al., 2007; Fluent Inc., 2005).
The radiative transfer equation will be solved for a finite
number of discrete solid angles, each associated with the
vector direction ~ s fixed in the Cartesian system (X, Y, Z)
in the discrete ordinates radiation model. The discrete
model transforms the radiative equation into a transport
equation for radiation intensity in spatial coordinates.
The solar ray tracing algorithm is employed to predict
the direct solar illumination energy source that results from
incident solar radiation (Fluent Inc., 2005). This algorithm
is a module incorporated in Fluent software and has an
advantage over the solar loading algorithm, which treats
the heat source term as a constant and was used in the pre-
vious study (Chen et al., 2007). This algorithm takes a
beam which is modeled using the sun position vector and
illumination parameters, applies it to any or all wall or
inlet/outlet boundary zones specified, performs a face-by-
face shading analysis to determine well-defined shadows
on all boundary faces and interior walls, and computes
the heat flux on the boundary faces that results from the
incident radiation (Fluent Inc., 2005). In the present
research, the particles’ size is large enough to prevent the
dispersing and flying of the particles inside the cavity.
The particles drop from the top inlet and form a curtain
in the cavity. Therefore, the scattering can be neglected
1818 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827

and the scattering coefficient can be set at 0 in the numerical
simulation.
4. Numerical procedure
The governing equations are solved in the Cartesian
coordinate system with a finite volume method. A non-
staggered grid storage scheme is adopted to define the dis-
crete control volumes. A power law differencing scheme is
employed in the present paper and a segregated solver is
selected. In order to resolve the coupling between pressure
and velocity, the SIMPLE algorithm is adopted. The gov-
erning equations, which were discrete and non-linear, are
linearized using an implicit technique with respect to set
of dependent variables. The algebraic equations are solved
iteratively using an additive correction multi grid method
with a Gauss–Seidel relaxation procedure. The solid parti-
cles are inserted into the cavity using an ‘‘injection model”
from the top inlet. The particle location and surrounding
temperature (both the air and surrounding particles) are
updated after each calculation step during the calculation.
4.1. Wind speed selection and wind attacking direction
The studied range of the wind speed has to cover most
of the possible working conditions of an SPSR. For exam-
ple, the statistics of wind speed from a local station in Las
Vegas, Nevada, U.S., which is a possible solar site because
of the abundant solar resources, (U.S. DOE) are illustrated
in Fig. 2. The selected wind speed range for the present
investigation, Beaufort number 1–5 (Icelandic Metrological
Office and UCAR, 2008), are ensured to satisfy most of the
wind attacking conditions in the local area. The attacking
angle a (in plane of XOZ in Fig. 1) and b (in plane of
YOZ in Fig. 1) will be studied, with values of a = 0°,
a = 45°, a = 90°, b = ±90° and b = ±45°.
4.2. Calculating domain selection
The research of wind effects on an object have been for
many years an important subject because of its technolog-
ical significance, such as for a skyscraper or a bridge in a
strong wind field. However, most of the researchers simply
selected a domain much larger than the object. The dimen-
sions of the calculated domains are chosen randomly, as
long they are assumed large enough (Perez-Rabago, 2006;
Fu, 2007; Blocken, 2007; Bettle, 2003). It is necessary to
conduct a domain independent study before the simulation.
Two important dimensions will be studied, the side
space S and the approaching length L, as shown in
Fig. 1. Two typical variables, pressure and velocity, are
examined at points A and B in Fig. 1. During the domain
independent study, no wind protection system is in opera-
tion and the wind attacking direction is normal to the aper-
ture. The impact of different values of L and S are show in
Figs. 3 and 4. The pressure is normalized based on the
operating pressure (1 atm) and the velocity is normalized
based on the wind speed. The approaching length L = 3,
5, 7, 10, and 15 m have been studied and the side space
have been studied for S = 0 m (without side space), 1, 3,
5, 7, and 10 m. From the comparisons, the values of
L = 7 m and S = 3 m can ensure a difference of the calcu-
lating results within 5% with a good calculation efficiency
and will be selected for the present study.
4.3. Mesh independent study
Four mesh systems have been created for the grid inde-
pendence study. Mesh #1 has 222,939 nodes and 209,320
hexahedral cells; mesh #2 has 597,350 nodes and 624,120
hexahedral cells; mesh #3 has 1,068,926 nodes and
1,031,076 hexahedral cells; and mesh #4 has 1,563,626
1.001 0.35

25 25
P at Point A 0.3
1.0008 P at Point B
MaximumSpeed
AverageSpeed
V at Point A
V at Point B 0.25
20 20
NormalizedPressure

NormalizedVelocity
WindSpeed(m/s)

1.0006
0.2
15 15

Beaufort6 0.15
1.0004
10 Beaufort5 10
0.1
Beaufort4
1.0002
5 Beaufort3 5
0.05
Beaufort2
Beaufort1
0 0 1 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Month L (m)

Fig. 2. The statistics of wind speed in Las Vegas and the typical values for Fig. 3. The normalized pressure and velocity for different approaching
study in the present model. length L.
 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827 1819

1.001 0.35 sis and the physical properties of the solid particle are given
P at point A in Table 1. No gray diffuse walls with an emissivity of 0.8
P at Point B
V at point A 0.3 are used. A diffuse fraction of 0.9 and 1.0 has been used
1.0008 V at Point B for the visible light band and infrared band respectively.
It is assumed that the walls are perfectly insulated. A uni-

NormalizedVelocity
0.25
Normalized Pressure

form solar incident radiation flux of 920 kW/m2 is used

1.0006 for the solar receiver performance calculations (Evans
0.2
et al., 1985, 1987). The cavity efficiency is defined as,
Qp
0.15
1.0004 g¼  ð5Þ
Qs
0.1  p is the integrated energy absorbed by the particles
where, Q
1.0002

and Qs is the total incident solar energy enters the cavity
0.05 through the aperture.

5.1. The influence of wind attacking angle a without

1 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 aerowindow protection
S (m)

Fig. 4. The normalized pressure and velocity for different side space S. The wind attacking direction effect has been studied
with different angle of a and with different wind speeds,
without the protection of an aerowindow. When the angle
nodes and 1,501,236 hexahedral cells. With the same oper- a is studied, the angle b is kept at zero in all the cases. At
ating conditions, the normalized velocity and temperature first, the cases with normal attacking wind (a = 0°, b = 0°)
at points A and B (shown in Fig. 1) are compared in is examined with different wind speed. The cavity efficiency
Fig. 5. It can be seen that the differences for both values for the cases with different a and wind speed is shown in
decrease to less than 5% when the mesh nodes increases Fig. 6. The cavity efficiency is in the range from 46.7% (case
to 1,068,926 (mesh #3). To save the calculating time and with a = 0° and Vwind = 0 m/s) to 53.1% (case with a = 90°
to ensure the accuracy, a mesh with 1,068,926 nodes and and Vwind = 6.5 m/s) without the protection of an aerowin-
1,031,076 hexahedral cells (mesh #3) is selected for the dow. The corresponding average particle exiting tempera-
present work. ture is about 1051.2 K for cavity efficiency 46.7% and
1075.6 K for cavity efficiency 53.1%.
5. Results and discussion The case without blowing wind (Vwind = 0 m/s) under-
goes a large convection loss if there is no protection by
A two band isotropic radiation calculation is conducted an aerowindow, which leads to very low cavity efficiency.
with a solar band from 0.2 to 1.5 lm and an infrared band The temperature contours of this case on plane C (shown
from 1.5 to 30 lm. Detailed input conditions of the analy- in Fig. 1) are shown in Fig. 7 and it illustrates the escape
of the hot air from the upper part of the aperture. The
1.6 1.6
velocity vectors on plane C are illustrated in Figs. 8 and
9 shows the zoom-in view in the receiver region. As can
1.4 1.4 be seen from Figs. 8 and 9, the hot air escapes from the
top of the aperture and the cold air enters from the bottom
NormalizedVelocityMagnitude

1.2 1.2 of the aperture. When wind attacks normally to the aper-
NormalizedTemperature

ture (a = 0°), a stronger wind blowing normal to the aper-

1 1 ture will press the air jet flow to cover the aperture and
reduce the escape of the hot air from the cavity so that
0.8 0.8 higher cavity efficiency can be obtained.
From the comparison in Fig. 6, the efficiency of the
0.6 0.6 cases with wind attacking from a = 45° has no significant
V at Point A difference from the cases with normal wind attacking
0.4 0.4
V at Point B (a = 0°). The wind of Vwind = 1 m/s, and Vwind = 2.5 m/s
T at Point A
T at Point B with a = 45 can reduce the large convective heat loss.
0.2 0.2
Therefore, the cavity efficiency is slightly higher than the
0 normal wind cases. With a high wind speed (larger than
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 4.5 m/s), the wind with an attacking angle a = 45° causes
TotalNodes (millions) more cold air to enter the cavity and cause strong turbu-
Fig. 5. The normalized velocity and temperature for different mesh
lence in the cavity and results in lower cavity efficiency than
systems. the cases with a = 0°.
1820 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827

Table 1
Simulation conditions for gas flow and properties of solid particle.
Gas flow Solid particle
Particle density: 3200 kg/m3
Operating pressure: 101,000 Pa Heat capacity: 1085 J/kg-K
Air outlet condition: Pressure outlet Thermal conductivity: 6.67 W/m-K
Wind temperature: 300 K Particle emissivity: 0.9
Air jet temperature: 300 K Particle diameter: 650 lm
Back flow temperature: 300 K Particle total flow rate: 5.0 kg/s
Particle initial temperature: 873 K
Particle initial velocity: 0.088 m/s

0.6 to increase when wind speed increases. For the same wind
speed, the cavity efficiency of the case with a = 90° is
slightly higher than that of the cases with a = 45° and
a = 0°. This is because the wind blowing parallel to the
0.55
aperture (a = 90°) leads less cold air to enter the cavity
CavityEfficiency

than the cases with a = 45° and a = 0°.

0.5 5.2. The influence of wind attacking angle b without

aerowindow protection
V aj=0 m/s (α= 0 o, β= 0 o)
V aj=0 m/s (α= 45 o, β= 0 o) The wind effect with different attacking angle b is then
0.45
m/s (α= 90 , β= 0 )
o o
V aj=0
V aj=8 m/s (α= 0 , β= 0 )
o o studied, while the angle a is kept to be zero. The cavity effi-
V aj=8 m/s (α= 45 o, β= 0 o) ciency of cases in which wind blows with a positive b (typ-
m/s (α= 90 , β= 0 )
o o
V aj=8 ically b = 90° and b = 45°) is shown in Fig. 10, compared
0.4 with the cases in which the wind blows normal to the aper-
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
WindSpeed (m/s) ture (b = 0°). An interesting finding from Fig. 10 is that the
efficiency of cases of b = 45° increases quickly when wind
Fig. 6. The cavity efficiency for different wind speed and attacking angle a
velocity increases from Vwind = 2.5 m/s to Vwind = 4.5 m/s
(b = 0°).
and then drops slowly. The reason for this phenomenon
is that the blowing wind is not able to prevent the large loss
of the heated air from the aperture at a relatively low wind
temperature velocity. However, the blowing wind covers the aperture
400
2000 and serves as an ‘‘aerowindow”, when the wind velocity
1800
1600 reaches 4.5 m/s or higher. The wind prevents the hot air
50

1400
0

1200 from escaping from the cavity, as can be seen in Fig. 11.
1000
800 Thus the cavity efficiency increases obviously. After the
1000 900 600
400
wind formed a special ‘‘aerowindow”, a wind speed higher
600
than 4.5 m/s will bring more cold air into the cavity. There-
fore, the cavity efficiency drops slowly when wind velocity
900
1400

800
exceeds 4.5 m/s.
Hot air escapes. From the comparison, the cavity efficiency of the cases
7 00
with b = 90° is relatively low. There is no obvious differ-
ence in the cavity efficiency between the cases with
b = 90° and the cases with b = 0°.
Y The reason is that the blowing wind in cases with
b = 90° cannot cover the aperture well. Some hot air
Z X
escapes from the cavity, while some cold air enters the cav-
ity. At a higher wind speed with b = 90°, some hot air
Fig. 7. The temperature contours on plane C for the case with Vaj = 0 m/s which escapes from the cavity may reenter the cavity. This
and Vwind = 0 m/s, unit: K. small circulation near the aperture contributes to the slight
increase of the cavity efficiency with the wind speed.
The cavity efficiency of cases in which wind blows
The efficiency curve of the cases with a wind attacking with a negative angle b (typically b = 90° and
angle a = 90° has the same tendency with the cases with b = 45°) is shown in Fig. 12, compared with the case
a = 45° and a = 0°. Basically, the cavity efficiency tends in which the wind blows normal to the aperture
 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827 1821

1m/s

Hot air escapes.

Zoom region

Z X

Fig. 8. The velocity vectors on plane C for the case with Vaj = 0 m/s and Vwind = 0 m/s.

1m/s

Hot air escapes.

Cold air enters the cavity.

Z X

Fig. 9. The zoom-in view of velocity vectors on plane C (the cavity region) from Fig. 8.

(b = 0°). From the comparison in Fig. 12, the wind effect For the cases with b = 90°, the cavity efficiency
on the cavity efficiency is more complex when wind increases with wind speed, reaches a maximum value at
blows with a negative angle b. Vwind = 4.5 m/s and Vwind = 6.5 m/s, and then decreases
1822 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827

0.6 For the cases with b = 45°, the cavity efficiency

increases with wind speed gradually. The reason is that
the wind blow from bottom with b = 45° cannot formed
0.55
an ‘‘aerowindow” until the wind speed reaches 9 m/s. How-
ever, a higher wind speed reduces the hot air loss from the
Cavity Efficiency

aperture and causes less cold air to enter the cavity. There-
fore, the cavity efficiency increases gradually with the wind
0.5 speed till the ‘‘aerowindow” is formed at Vwind = 9 m/s.
V aj=0 m/s (α= 0 o, β= 0 o) The maximum cavity efficiency for cases with different
V aj=8 m/s (α= 0 o, β= 0 o) angle b can reach 59.2% with an average particles exiting
0.45 V aj=0 m/s (α= 0 o, β= 45 o) temperature of 1098.9 K (case with b = 90°, a = 0°,
0 , β= 45 )
o o
V aj=8 m/s (α= Vwind = 4.5 m/s, and Vaj = 0 m/s).
V aj=0 m/s (α= 0 o, β= 90 o)
V aj=8 m/s (α= 0 o, β= 90 o)
0.4 5.3. The influence of wind attacking angle a with aerowindow
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
WindSpeed (m/s) protection
Fig. 10. The cavity efficiency for different wind speed and attacking angle
b (positive).
Later on, the protection of an aerowindow formed by an
air jet atop of the aperture has been investigated, consider-
ing different attacking wind. The air jet velocity Vaj is set at
again. When the wind velocity is at 1 m/s, a large amount 8 m/s from the previous study since this air jet velocity
of hot air escapes from the cavity and a large amount of gives a good protection for most operating conditions.
cold air enters into the cavity from the aperture. This heat The wind attacking angle a is studied and the efficiency
loss is reduced when the wind velocity increases to 2.5 m/s. is shown in Fig. 6, while the angle b is kept to be zero.
When the wind velocity reaches 4.5 m/s and 6.5 m/s, the Again, the cases with normal wind (b = 0°, a = 0°) has
wind forms an ‘‘aerowindow” right outside of the aperture. been investigated and the results are compared. As an
Both the escape of hot air and the entrance of the cold air example, the energy balance and detailed results have been
are reduced to a very small amount. When the wind veloc- listed in Table 2 for a case with b = 0°, a = 0°,
ity exceeds 6.5 m/s, a large amount of the cold air enters Vwind = 1 m/s, and Vaj = 8 m/s. From Table 2, most of
the cavity and causes the decrease in the cavity efficiency. the incident solar energy has been transferred to the parti-

4.5m/s

The wind flow covers

the aperature.

Z X

Fig. 11. The zoom-in view of the velocity vectors for case Vwind = 4.5 m/s, b = 45°, and Vaj = 0 m/s.

0.6
0.55
Cavity Efficiency
0.5
V aj=0
V aj=8
0.45
V aj=0
V aj=8
V aj=0
V aj=8
0.4
0 1 2 3 4 5
Wind Speed m/s)
Fig. 12. The cavity efficiency for different wind speed and attacking angle
b (negative).
cles by radiation. A large amount of the energy has been
lost by convection and the remained part is the radiation
heat loss.
From the comparison with the cases without an air jet
flow, the air jet flow can enhance the cavity efficiency by
forming an aerowindow at the aperture in most cases, espe-
cially when the wind speed is not very high. However, the
combination of the high speed wind and the air jet flow
may lead to escape of the hot air, invasion of the cold air
and high turbulence inside the cavity, such as the cases with
Vwind P 4.5 m/s and a = 45°.
For example, the velocity vectors in the cavity region for
the case with a = 45°, Vwind = 9 m/s, and Vaj = 8 m/s in
Planes L (x = 0.5 m) and R (x = 1.5 m) are shown in Figs.
13 and 14. It can be found, the wind with an attacking
angle of a = 45° forces a great amount of cold air to enter
the cavity from the left side of the aperture (as shown in
Plane L, Fig. 13) and causes a great amount of hot air to
escape the cavity from the right side of the aperture (as
shown in Plane R, Fig. 14).
From Fig. 6, the cavity efficiency of cases with a = 90° is
much higher than that of the case without aerowindow
protection, when the wind speed is lower than 9 m/s. With
the protection of the aerowindow, the cavity efficiency
Table 2
Energy balance and detailed results for a case with b = 0°, a = 0°,
Vwind = 1 m/s, and Vaj = 8 m/s.
Description
Maximum temperature of particles
Average temperature of particles
Cavity efficiency
Incident solar flux through the aperture
Energy absorbed by the particles
Heat loss by convection
Heat loss by radiation
T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827 1823
decreases as wind speed increases (with a = 90°). This ten-
dency coincides with that of cases of a = 45° and a = 0°.
The reason is that a strong attacking wind causes more
cold air to enter the cavity.
The maximum cavity efficiency for cases with different
angle a and with protection of an aerowindow can reach
58.5% with an average particles exiting temperature of
1096.3 K (case with b = 0°, a = 90°, Vwind = 1 m/s, and
m/s (α= 0 o, β= 0 o) Vaj = 8 m/s). The minimum cavity efficiency is 46.6%
m/s (α= 0 o, β= 0 o) with an average particles exiting temperature of
m/s (α= 0 o, β= -45 o) 1050.8 K in the case with b = 0°, a = 45°, Vwind = 9 m/
m/s (α= 0 o, β= -45 o)
m/s (α= 0 , β= -90 )
o o s, and Vaj = 8 m/s.
m/s (α= 0 , β= -90 )
o o
5.4. The influence of wind attacking angle b with aerowindow
6 7 8 9 10 protection
With the protection of an aerowindow, the wind effect of
different attacking angle b is studied, while the angle a is set
at zero. The cavity efficiency of cases with positive b (typ-
ically b = 90° and b = 45°) is shown in Fig. 10, compared
with the cases with b = 0° and the cases without an air
jet flow.
From the comparison, the protection of an aerowindow
is very helpful for the wind attacking with a positive angle
of b. The cavity efficiency has been ensured to be higher
than 54% for all the cases. For cases with b = 45° and
b = 90°, the air jet flow forms an ideal aerowindow with
the help of the blowing wind. A slight decreasing of the
cavity efficiency with the increasing wind speed is cased
by the entrance of some of the cold air jet flow.
The cavity efficiency of cases in which wind blows with a
negative angle of b is shown in Fig. 12 (typically b = 90°
and b = 45°). The wind effect is more complex if the wind
blows with a negative b.
For b = 90°, a low wind speed of Vwind = 1 m/s does
not affect much on the aerowindow formed by the air jet
flow. Therefore, high cavity efficiency can be obtained.
When the wind speed reaches 2.5 m/s, the wind is strong
enough to break the aerowindow from the bottom of the
aperture. The cold air enters the cavity from the bottom
of the aperture and leads to a minimum value of the cavity
efficiency. When the wind speed reaches 4.5 m/s, the strong
wind blowing upwards generates a circulation of air at the
aperture (See Fig. 15). A part of cold air trying to enter the
cavity is sucked out again so the cavity efficiency is
increased. This circulation becomes strongest when
Vwind = 9 m/s and a new aerowindow can be formed, as
shown in Fig. 16. Therefore, the cavity efficiency keeps
increasing with the increasing of the wind speed from
4.5 m/s to 9 m/s.
Symbol Results
For cases wind blowing with b = 45°, the wind with
Tp_max 1149.3 K
speed of Vwind = 1 m/s presses on the air jet flow and forms
Tp 1092.4 K
g 57.5% an ideal aerowindow and high cavity efficiency can be
s
Q 2070 kW obtained. When the wind speed reaches 2.5 m/s, a small
p
Q 1189.5 kW amount of hot air starts to escape from the cavity and
QL_Conv 745.215 kW the cavity efficiency starts to decrease. When the wind
QL_Rad 135.285 kW
speed reaches 4.5 m/s, the air jet flow is mostly blew away.
1824 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827

9m/s

Cold air enters the SPSR

from left of the aperture.

Z X

Fig. 13. The velocity vectors in Plane L for case with a = 45°, Vwind = 9 m/s, and Vaj = 8 m/s.

A large amount of hot air escapes from the cavity and a efficiency reaches a minimum value. A very interesting phe-
large amount of cold air enters the cavity. Thus, the cavity nomenon is that the strong wind blow from b = 45° can

9m/s

Hot air escapes from the SPSR

from the right of the aperture.

Z X

Fig. 14. The velocity vectors in Plane R for case with a = 45°, Vwind = 9 m/s, and Vaj = 8 m/s.
 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827 1825

4.5m/s

A circulation
at the aperture.

Z X

Fig. 15. The velocity vectors on plane C (the cavity region) for the case with Vaj = 8 m/s, Vwind = 4.5 m/s, b = 90°, and a = 0°.

form an aerowindow from down side when the wind speed protection of this reverse aerowindow also increases the
reaches 6.5 m/s and 9 m/s as can be seen from Fig. 17. The cavity efficiency significantly.

9m/s

Aerowindow

Z X

Fig. 16. The velocity vectors on plane C (the cavity region) for the case with Vaj = 8 m/s, Vwind = 9 m/s, b = 90°, and a = 0°.
1826 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827
Fig. 17. The velocity vectors on plane C (the cavity region) for the case with Vaj = 8 m/s, Vwind = 9 m/s, b = 45°, and a = 0°.
6. Conclusions
The wind effect, both the wind speed and wind attacking
direction, on the performance of an SPSR is investigated
numerically, with and without the protection of an aero-
window. The independence of the calculating domain is
studied in order to select a proper domain for the numeri-
cal simulation. From the numerical simulation, wind has
obvious influence on the cavity efficiency and the particles
exiting temperature.
With this small conceptual experimental design, the
solid particles can be heated up to at least 1050.8 K with
a cavity efficiency of 46.6% in the studied attacking wind
fields.
An SPSR in a field without wind undergoes a large con-
vection loss and has very low cavity efficiency without pro-
tection of an aerowindow. When wind attacks normally to
the aperture, a stronger wind blowing normal to the aper-
ture will keep more hot air in the cavity so that higher cav-
ity efficiency can be obtained.
The combination effect of the wind and the air jet flow is
complex. Basically, an aerowindow formed by the air jet
flow has two kinds of effect on the cavity efficiency of an
SPSR, the positive effect and the negative effect. The posi-
tive effect is that an aerowindow can prohibit or reduce the
escape of the hot air from the cavity, separate the hot air in
the cavity and the cold environment, and reduce the con-
vective heat transfer between the cavity and the environ-
ment. The negative effect results from that the air jet flow
9m/s
A reverse
aerowindow
Z X
may enter the cavity, especially when the wind blows with
a non-zero angle a or with a negative b.
The air jet flow may cause high turbulence when it com-
bines with the wind flow and results in a low cavity
efficiency.
However, the aerowindow formed by an air jet with
velocity Vaj = 8 m/s can enhance the cavity efficiency in
most cases, especially when the wind speed is not very high.
An aerowindow is suggested to install on the top of the
aperture in the SPSR and the injection condition of the
air jet may need to adjust according to different attacking
wind.
Acknowledgment
This research is supported by the U.S. Department of
Energy, Hydrogen Program (Grant No. DE-FG36-
03GO13062).
References
Bettle, J., 2003. A computational study of the aerodynamic forces acting
on a tractor–trailer vehicle on a bridge in cross-wind. Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 91, 573–592.
Blocken, B., 2007. CFD evaluation of wind speed conditions in passages
between parallel buildings—effect of wall-function roughness modifi-
cations for the atmospheric boundary layer flow. Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 95, 941–962.
Chen, H.J., Chen, Y.T., Hsieh, H.T., 2007. Computational fluid dynamics
modeling of gas-particle flow within a solid-particle solar receiver. Journal
of Solar Energy Engineering—Transactions of the ASME 129, 160–170.
 T. Tan et al. / Solar Energy 83 (2009) 1815–1827
Clift, R., Grace, J.R., Weber, M.E., 1978. Bubbles, Drops and Particles.
Academic Press, London.
Evans, G., Houf, W., Grief, R., Crowe, C., 1985. Gas particle flow within
a high temperature cavity including the effects of thermal radiation,
heat transfer—Denver 1985. ASME 81, 245.
Evans, G., Houf, W., Grief, R., Crowe, C., 1987. Gas-particle flow within
a high temperature solar cavity receiver including radiation heat
transfer. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 109, 134–142.
Fluent Inc., 2005, Fluent Users Guide, Version 6.2.16, Lebanon, USA.
Fu, J.Y., 2007. Wind effects on the world’s longest spatial lattice structure:
loading characteristics and numerical prediction. Journal of Construc-
tional Steel Research 63, 1341–1350.
Hruby, J.M., 1986. A Technical Feasibility Study of a Solid Particle Solar
Central Receiver for High Temperature Applications, Sandia National
Laboratories, Sandia report, SAND86-8211.
Hruby, J.M., Burolla, V.P., 1984. Solid Particle Receiver Experiments:
Velocity Measurements. Sandia National Laboratories, SAND84-8238.
Icelandic Metrological Office, Windspeed. Available from: <http://
andvari.vedur.is/english/wind_eng.html>.
Kim, S.E., Choudhury, D., Patel, B., 1997. Computations of complex
turbulent flows using the commercial code FLUENT. In: Proceedings
of the ICASE/LaRC/AFOSR Symposium on Modeling Complex
Turbulent Flows, Hampton, VA.
1827
Martin, J., Vitko, J., 1982. ASCUAS: A Solar Central Receiver Utilizing a
Solid Thermal Carrier, Sandia National Laboratories, SAND82-8203.
Meier, A., 1999. A predictive CFD model for a falling particle receiver/
reactor exposed to concentrated sunlight. Chemical Engineering
Science 54, 2899–2905.
Perez-Rabago, C.A., 2006. Heat transfer in a conical cavity calorimeter for
measuring thermal power of a point focus concentrator. Solar Energy
80, 1434–1442.
Shih, T.H., Liou, W.W., Shabbir, A., Yang, Z., Zhu, J., 1995. A new k–e
eddy viscosity model for high Reynolds number turbulent flows.
Computers & Fluids 24 (3), 227–238.
Siegel, N.P., Kolb, G.J., Kim, K., Rangaswamy, V.B., 2007. Solid particle
receiver flow characterization studies, ES2007-36118. Energy Sustain-
ability 2007, June 20–27, Long Beach, California.
Taussig, R.T., 1984. Aerowindows for center solar receivers. ASME 84-
WA/Sol-14, 1–12.
U.S. Department of Energy, Data Source TMY2-23169, WMO Station
723860, Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S. Available from: <http://www.eere.
energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/weatherdata/4_north_and_central_ame
rica_wmo_region_4/1_usa/USA_NV_Las.Vegas_TMY2.stat>.
UCAR (University Corporation of Atmospheric Research), 2008. Available
from: <http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/Atmosphere/
wind_speeds.html&edu=high>.