Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598 www.elsevier.

com/locate/renene

Optimizing the tilt angle of solar collectors

Adnan Shariah, M-Ali Al-Akhras, I.A. Al-Omari
Department of Applied Physics, Jordan University of Science and Technology, PO Box 3030, Irbid, Jordan Received 1 April 1997; accepted 19 April 2001

Abstract Solar collectors need to be tilted at the correct angle to maximize the performance of the system. In this paper, the annual solar fraction of the system (the fraction of energy that is supplied by solar energy) is used as an indicator to nd the optimum inclination angles for a thermosyphon solar water heater installed in northern and southern parts of Jordan. Calculations are carried out using the powerful computer program TRNSYS (Transient System Simulation). The system is assumed to operate with a daily hot water load of 150 l at 55C owing during the day according to the widely used Rand consumption prole. The results show that the optimum inclination angle for the maximum solar fraction is about f+(010) for the northern region (represented by Amman) and about f+(020) for the southern region (represented by the town of Aqaba). These values are greater than those for maximum solar radiation (which is commonly used as an indicator) at the top of the collector by about 5 to 8. 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

1. Introduction Solar systems, like any other system, need to be operated with the maximum possible performance. This can be achieved by proper design, construction, installation, and orientation. The orientation of the collector is described by its azimuth and tilt angles. Generally, systems installed in the northern hemisphere are oriented due south and tilted at a certain angle. Many investigations have been carried out to determine, or at least estimate, the best tilt angle for such systems. Some of these are, for example, f+20 [1], f+(1030) [2], f+10 [3] and f10 [4], whereas some researchers suggest two values for the tilt angle, one for summer and the other for winter, such as f20 [5], f8 [6] and f5 [7], where f is the latitude, + for winter, and for summer. In the past few years, computer programs have been used and the results have shown that the optimum tilt angle is almost equal to the latitude [811]. The common approach used by researchers has been to calculate
0960-1481/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. PII: S 0 9 6 0 - 1 4 8 1 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 1 0 6 - 9

588

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

Nomenclature Ac Collector area (m2) Dh Diameter of collectors headers (m) Di, Do Diameter of collectors inlet and outlet connecting pipes (m) Diameter of collectors risers (m) Dr FRUL Slope of the collector efciency curve [kJ/(h m2 C)] FR(ta)n Intercept of the collectors efciency curves Collectors test ow rate [kg/(h m2)] Gtest Height of the auxiliary heating element above the bottom of the Haux tank (m) Vertical distance between the outlet and inlet of the collector (m) Hc Vertical distance between outlet of the tank and inlet of the Ho collector (m) Height of the collectors return above the bottom of the tank (m) Hr Height of the tank (m) Ht Height of the auxiliary thermostat above the bottom of the tank (m) Hth Length of the collector (m) Lc Length of the collectors headers (m) Lh Li, Lo Length of inlet and outlet connecting piping (m) NB1, NB2 Number of bends in inlet and outlet connecting pipes Number of parallel collector risers Nr Power of the auxiliary heater (kJ/h) Paux Energy input to tank from the auxiliary heater (J) Qaux Tmain Temperature of water from the mains (C) Temperature of water delivered to load (C) Tset Ui, Uo Heat loss coefcients for inlet and outlet connecting pipes [kJ/(h m2 C)] (UA)t Overall heat loss coefcient for storage tank [kJ/(h m2 C)] Volume of daily load (m3) Vl Volume of storage tank (m3) Vt Width of the collector (m) Wc b Tilt angle of the collector (deg) h Annual efciency f Annual solar fraction f Latitude (deg) Ground reectance rg

the tilt angle which maximizes the amount of solar radiation received by the collector. In the literature of solar heaters, there are very limited works that have studied the problem using other approaches. For example, Prasad and Chandra [12] optimized the tilt angle of the collector to get maximum ow rate rather than maximum collec-

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

589

tion. Saraf and Hamad [13] found the optimum tilt angle by searching for the value for which the useful energy gained by the collector was at its maximum for a particular day or a specied period of time for a typical collector in Basra, Iraq. They found that the optimum tilt angle was higher than the latitude by about 8. Iqbal [14] investigated the optimum collector tilt for a liquid active solar heating system employing at-plate collectors. He has studied the collector tilt as a function of collector area, annual heating load, and the ratio of space heating load to service hot water load for the values of 5 and 15. He found that the optimum collector tilt varied from f10 to f+15, depending on the solar fraction. Generally, domestic solar water heaters are installed to supply 7080% of the required energy and may reach a value of 9095% in warm and hot climates. Our hypothesis is that the optimum tilt angle for a solar water heater is one which maximizes the annual solar fraction of the system. This angle is not necessarily equal to the one which maximizes the solar radiation at the top of the collector. Usually solar water heaters installed in warm climates, like that in Jordan, are operated with a solar fraction of unity during summer. In fact, the useful energy from the collector can be higher than that required for the load. Therefore, there is no advantage in tilting the collector at an angle that increases the solar intensity at the top of the collector during this period. It is feasible to increase the solar fraction of the system by increasing the useful energy in winter and decreasing the energy collected during summer, taking into account that this should not be lower than the load energy. This can be done by searching for a tilt angle that maximizes the annual solar fraction of the system throughout the year. For this purpose, the powerful computer program TRNSYS (Transient System Simulation) [15] was used to calculate the annual optimum tilt angle for a thermosyphon solar water heater installed in both northern and southern Jordan, represented by two places (Amman and the town of Aqaba respectively).

2. System description and mathematical model The schematic diagram of the system studied in the present work is shown in Fig. 1. It consists of a at-plate collector, with a length of 1.8 m, connected to a vertical storage tank, with a height of 1 m, leveled up with the top of the collector. A check valve is added to the pipes connecting the collector and the storage tank to prevent reverse circulation at times of low or no solar radiation. An auxiliary heater and a thermostat are placed in the storage tank, 10 cm below the surface of water, to meet the required load energy when the useful energy gained by the collector is not sufcient to meet the load. A daily load of 150 l at a temperature of 55C was delivered to the user and distributed over a 24-hour period according to the well-known Rand hot-water distribution prole (Fig. 2) [16]. To ensure that hot water is delivered at the desired temperature, a ow mixer is mounted between the system and the faucet to mix the water coming from the storage tank, when its temperature is higher than the load temperature, with water from the mains. The area of the collector was varied between 2 and 5 m2 in order to organize various solar fractions. During this variation,

590

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

Fig. 1.

Schematic diagram of the considered system.

Fig. 2.

Rand hot water consumption prole.

the ratio of the storage tank volume to the collector area was kept at 50 l/m2 as recommended by [17]. The values of the parameters FRUL and FR(ta)n, which characterize the optical and thermal properties of the collector, were 21.6 kJ/(h m2 C) and 0.6 respectively. These values are the average for most solar collectors manufactured in Jordan as indicated by [18]. A full description of the system under

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

591

consideration is shown in Table 1. The values appearing in the table are taken from the results of [1416]. The storage tank is modeled as a fully stratied tank with a variable number of nodes or segments. A detailed description of the model of the storage tank is given in [19,20]. The required hourly solar radiation and dry bulb temperature for the simulation program TRNSYS were calculated from the monthly average daily values supplied by the Jordanian Meteorological Department [21] using a component supplied with TRNSYS. The method of calculation used by this component was based on the results of [2224] and the method used to calculate solar radiation on the tilted surfaces is given in detail in [25]. The performance of the system is characterized by the annual solar fraction (the fraction of load supplied by the solar energy) and the annual efciency of the collector, which are dened as Q1Qaux f Q1 Qu h Ac IT (1) (2)

where Qu, Ql, Qaux, and AcIT, respectively, are useful energy, energy delivered to the load, energy supplied by the auxiliary heater, and the sum of the hourly radiation on the surface of the collector over a specied period of time.

3. Results and discussion The variation of the annual solar fraction of the thermosyphon solar water heater with the inclination angle of the collector is shown in Figs. 3 and 4 for various
Table 1 System design parameters Ac Dh Di, Do Dr FRUL FR(ta)n Gtest Haux Hc Ho Hr Ht Hth Lh Varied from 2 to 5 m2 20 mm 15 mm 5 mm 21.6 kJ/(h m2 C) 0.6 72 kg/(h m2) 0.9 cm 0.95 m 0.95 m 0.9 m 1.0 m 0.9 m 5m NB1,NB2 Li, Lo Nr Paux Tmain Tset Ui, Uo (UA)t Vl Vt Wc b f rg 5 4 m, 3 m varied from 5 to 19 100 MJ/h 22C 55C 10 kJ/(h m2 C) 5.4 kJ/(h m2 C) 150 l/day varied from 100 to 250 l varied from 1.12 to 2.78 m variable (deg) variable (deg) 0.2

592

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

Fig. 3. Variation of the yearly solar fraction with the inclination angle for different collector areas for Amman region.

Fig. 4. Variation of the yearly solar fraction with the inclination angle for different collector areas for Aqaba region.

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

593

collector areas and for Amman and Aqaba regions respectively. When the area of the collector is small (Ac=2 m2), the system operates with a relatively low solar fraction: below 70% for Amman and around 80% for Aqaba. The optimum tilt angle for the system is about f3 (where f is the latitude) for Amman and about f for Aqaba. If the area of the collector is 3 m2, the solar fraction will increase accordingly and reach a value of 82% for Amman and 92% for Aqaba. The maximum values are observed at a tilt angle range of about f+(05) for both Amman and Aqaba. If the area of the collector is increased by 1 m2 (or Ac=4 m2), the solar fraction will increase to reach a value of 87% and 96% for Amman and Aqaba respectively. These maximum values correspond to a tilt angle range of about f+(010) for Amman and about f+(020) for Aqaba. The results for Ac=5 m2 are found to be the same as for Ac=4 m2. On the other hand, the solar radiation at the top of the collector is shown in Fig. 5 for various collector areas and for both places. It is clear that the maximum solar radiation received by the collector occurs at tilt angles of about f8 for Amman and f5 for Aqaba. The above-mentioned optimum values for both the maximum solar fraction and the maximum solar radiation at the top of the collector are shown in Table 2. Comparing the results in this table, one can see that for Ac=2 m2 the optimum tilt angle for maximum solar fraction is greater than the angle that maximizes solar radiation by about 5 for both regions. If the area of the collector is 3 m2, the optimum angle for the maximum solar fraction will have a range of values (5 for Amman and 10 for Aqaba) rather than a single value, and is larger than the angle that maximizes the solar radiation by about 8 for Amman and about 5 for Aqaba. For large collector areas (Ac=4 or 5 m2) the optimum angle for maximum solar fraction is greater than those for maximum solar radiation by about

Fig. 5. Variation of the yearly solar radiation at the top of the collector with the inclination angle for both regions.

594

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

Table 2 Comparison between optimum inclination angles for different collector areas Region Ac (m2) fopt for maximum solar fopt for maximum solar radiation fraction f8 f8 f8 f8 f5 f5 f5 f5 f3 f+(05) f+(010) f+(010) f f+(010) f+(020) f+(020)

Amman

Aqaba

2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5

the same amount as for Ac=3 m2. However, the range of values for the optimum tilt angles for maximum solar fraction is about 10 for Amman and about 20 for Aqaba. It is clear that for all Ac values, the optimum tilt angles for the maximum solar fraction are higher than those for maximum solar radiation by about 8 for Amman and by about 5 for Aqaba. The optimum angle for the maximum solar fraction, being higher than that for the maximum solar radiation, can be explained with the help of Figs. 69 where the monthly average daily useful energy from the collector

Fig. 6. Monthly average daily useful energy and daily load energy for different inclination angles and for Ac=2 m2.

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

595

Fig. 7. Monthly average daily useful energy and daily load energy for different inclination angles and for Ac=3 m2.

is given as a function of the months of the year for various collector areas and inclination angles. Only data for Amman are shown in these gures to avoid repetition. The thick solid line in these gures represents the required energy for the load, whereas the other curves represent tilt angles ranging from f10 to f+10 as indicated in the gures. It is clear that the maximum useful energy values obtained from the collector during summer correspond to a small tilt angle, f10, and the amount of collected energy decreases as the tilt angle reaches a value of f+10 with an increment of 5. In winter when the maximum useful energy occurs at large tilt angles, the situation is reversed. The reason for this trend is that for small tilt angles the solar radiation has minimum incident angles at noon during the summer period, when the solar intensity is maximum. In winter this occurs for tilt angles greater than the latitude. Therefore, tilting the collector at angles smaller than the inclination angle will maximize the collected energy in summer and minimize it in winter. From the viewpoint of this discussion, and keeping in mind that the portion of energy that is greater than the load energy is useless, (this occurs in the North Pole in summer), one can nd the optimum inclination angle for the solar collectors by searching for the value that maximizes the solar fraction of the system, which, in this case, is the measure of the usefulness of the energy gained by the collector. For Ac=2 m2 (Fig. 6), the useful energy for the tilt angles ranging from f10 to f+5 is higher than the load energy throughout summer. This suggests that tilting the collector at an

596

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

Fig. 8. Monthly average daily useful energy and daily load energy for different inclination angles and for Ac=4 m2.

angle of f+5 rather than f10 will result in an increase in the collected energy in winter but will keep the system operating with a solar fraction of unity in summer. This is true for mid-summer and winter. However, the loss in spring (March to June) is not negligible. Therefore, the optimum tilt angle is between these two values (Table 2 shows that this angle is about f3). For Ac=3 m2 (Fig. 7), the useful energy is higher than the load energy for about seven months of the year for all tilt angles. During the remainder of the year, however, higher values for the useful energy are observed at larger tilt angles. Therefore, tilting the collector at an angle of f+10 rather than f10 will increase the solar fraction of the system. It is clear that the preferred tilt angle will decrease the amount of useful energy during summer, but this reduction will affect only the amount of energy that is beyond the need for the load. This result is more pronounced for collector areas of 4 and 5 m2 (Figs. 8 and 9).

4. Conclusion The present work has studied the optimum tilt angles for a thermosyphon solar water heater by using the annual solar fraction as an indicator, and has reached the following conclusions:

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

597

Fig. 9. Monthly average daily useful energy and daily load energy for different inclination angles and for Ac=5 m2.

1. The optimum tilt angle for the maximum solar fraction is larger than any of those for the maximum solar radiation at the top of the collector by about 5 to 8. 2. The optimum tilt angle of the collector depends on the operation strategy. 3. Systems operating with sufciently high solar fraction have a range of optimum angles from f to f+20. 4. The useful energy collected by the system is noticeably higher than the load energy during summer especially for a collector with an area of 3 m2 or larger. The author recommends that further work should be conducted to analyze the effect of the latitude and different climates on the optimum tilt angle.

References
[1] Hottel HC. Performance of at-plate energy collectors. In: Space Heating with Solar Energy, Proc. Course Symp. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1954. [2] Lo f GOG, Taybout RA. Cost of house heating with solar energy. Solar Energy 1973;14:253. [3] Kern J, Harris I. On the optimum tilt of a solar collector. Solar Energy 1975;17:97102. [4] Hyewood H. Operating experience with solar water heating. Journal of the Institution of Heating and Ventilation Engineers 1971;39:639. [5] Yellott H. Utilization of sun and sky radiation for heating cooling of buildings. ASHRAE Journal 1973;15:31.

598

A. Shariah et al. / Renewable Energy 26 (2002) 587598

[6] Lewis G. Optimum tilt of a solar collectors. Solar and Wind Technology 1987;4:407. [7] Garg HP, Gupta GL. In: Proceedings of the International Solar Energy Society, Congress, New Delhi, 1978;1134 [8] El-kassaby MM. The optimum seasonal and yearly tilt angle for south-facing solar collectors. ISES Solar World Congress, Paper No. 2.2.20, Hamburg (Germany), 1987. [9] Gopinathan KK. Solar radiation on variously oriented sloping surfaces. Solar Energy 1991;47:1739. [10] Soulayman SSH. On the optimum tilt of solar absorber plates. Renewable Energy 1991;1:5514. [11] Morcos VH. Optimum tilt angle and orientation for solar collectors in Assiut, Egypt. Renewable Energy 1994;4:2918. [12] Prasad M, Chandra KS. Optimum tilt of solar collector for maximum natural ow. Energy Conversion Management 1990;30:36979. [13] Saraf GR, Hamad FAW. Optimum tilt angle for a at plate solar collector. Energy Conversion Management 1988;28:18591. [14] Iqbal M. Optimum collector slope for residential heating in adverse climates. Solar Energy 1979;22:779. [15] TRNSYS 14.1 Users Manual. A Transient System Simulation Program. Solar Energy Laboratory, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1994. [16] J.J. Mutch, Residential water heating, fuel conservation, economics and public policy. Rand Report R1498, 1974. f GOG. The optimization of tank volume to collector area ratio for thermosyphon [17] Shariah AM, Lo solar water heater. Renewable Energy 1996;7:289300. [18] Internal Report. Department of Renewable Energy, Royal Scientic Society, Amman (Jordan) 1985. [19] A. Rousan, A. Shariah, Effects of operating conditions on design parameters of a thermosyphon solar water heaters. Energy Journal, IEC 2000. The First International Energy Conference 2000, May 79, 2000, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates. [20] A. Shariah, B. Shalabi, Optimal design for thermosyphon solar water heater. Renewable Energy, 1997;11:351361. [21] Jordan Climatological Data Handbook. Meteorological Department, Amman (Jordan), 1988. [22] Knight KM, Klein SA, Dufe JA. A methodology for the synthesis of hourly weather data. Solar Energy 1991;46:10920. [23] Graham VA, Hollands KGT, Unny TE. Stochastic variation of hourly solar radiation over the day. In: Advances in Solar Energy Technology, vol. 4, ISES Proceedings, Hamburg, Germany, September 1318, 1987 [24] Degelman LO. A weather simulation model for building energy analysis. ASHRAE Transactions, Symposium on Weather Data, WA, Annual Meeting, p. 435, June, 1976 [25] Rousan A, Shariah A. Solar and thermal energy gain through windows in Jordan. Renewable Energy 1996;7:25169.