Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 11691174

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Technical Note

Exergetic optimization of at plate solar collectors

S. Farahat, F. Sarhaddi*, H. Ajam
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan 98164-161, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 13 June 2007
Accepted 22 June 2008
Available online 13 August 2008

In this paper, an exergetic optimization of at plate solar collectors is developed to determine the
optimal performance and design parameters of these solar to thermal energy conversion systems. A
detailed energy and exergy analysis is carried out for evaluating the thermal and optical performance,
exergy ows and losses as well as exergetic efciency for a typical at plate solar collector under
given operating conditions. In this analysis, the following geometric and operating parameters are
considered as variables: the absorber plate area, dimensions of solar collector, pipes diameter, mass
ow rate, uid inlet, outlet temperature, the overall loss coefcient, etc. A simulation program is
developed for the thermal and exergetic calculations. The results of this computational program are
in good agreement with the experimental measurements noted in the previous literature. Finally, the
exergetic optimization has been carried out under given design and operating conditions and the
optimum values of the mass ow rate, the absorber plate area and the maximum exergy efciency
have been found. Thus, more accurate results and benecial applications of the exergy method in the
design of solar collectors have been obtained.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Exergy
Flat plate solar collector
Optimization

1. Introduction
In a solar domestic hot water system, the at plate solar
collector is the main part of the system. Hence, the optimal
performance of the solar collector is highly important. On the
other hand, the energy equation alone does not encounter the
internal losses; it cannot be a sufcient criterion for the at
plate solar collector efciency. But, the second law analysis is
more informative in regard to the optimum operating zone,
quantifying the inefciencies, their relative magnitudes and locations [1,2]. Therefore, the consideration of this article will be
on the detailed energy and exergy analysis of at plate solar
collectors for evaluating the thermal, optical and exergetic performance and nding the optimum values of the mass ow rate,
the absorber plate area and the maximum exergy efciency
under given operating conditions. Much research has been carried out in this category. In Refs. [38] models of thermodynamic analysis for solar collectors using concepts such as exergy
output, exergy efciency and entropy generation are elaborated.
However, it is assumed that the overall loss coefcient is constant or is computed from the empirical equation that has
specic restrictions.
Luminosu and Fara [2] discussed the optimal operation of at
plate solar collector by means of exergy analysis using numerical

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 98 541 2426206; fax: 98 541 2447092.

E-mail address: fsarhaddi@eng.usb.ac.ir (F. Sarhaddi).
0960-1481/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2008.06.014

simulation technique and nally gave some useful results for

a typical water heating system under given operating conditions.
However, they assumed the exergy ow rate in the global solar
radiation to be equal to the solar ux; the overall thermal loss
coefcient, the heat removal factor, the efciency factor, agent
uid properties and other heat transfer coefcients of the solar
collector are constant. Also, they considered the uid inlet temperature to be equal to the ambient temperature and constant.
They neglected the destroyed exergy caused by the ducts pressure drop. These subjects are not considered in the previous
literature [18]:
 A general model for the collector optical and thermal performance is not fullled or it is assumed that the overall loss coefcient and other heat transfer coefcients are constant or at
minimal effect.
 The complete optimization with respect to the design and
operating conditions is not carried out. Design conditions include the dimensions of the solar collector and operating
conditions include the mass ow rate of the solar collector.
 A common error using the Petela efciency equation obtaining
the solar radiation exergy is noted.
The previous subjects have been corrected for several types of
solar collectors in Refs. [911]. In this paper, a procedure to design
and optimization of at plate solar collectors based on exergy
analysis is developed. The exergy analysis of the solar collector is
parametrically dependent on its optical and energy analysis. Hence,

1170

S. Farahat et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 11691174

rstly the optical and energy analysis of the at plate solar collector
will be carried out. Then, the solar collector exergy efciency will be
computed and optimized.
2. Energy analysis
The proof of governing equations on the solar collector energy
analysis is not included to have a brief note [12]. The useful heat
gain (Qu) by the working uid is

_ p Tout  Tin ;
Qu mC

(1)

_ are the uid inlet, outlet temperature, heat

where Tin, Tout, Cp and m
capacity and mass ow rate of the agent uid, respectively. The
HottelWhillier equation for the useful heat gain (Qu) of a at plate
solar collector system, considering the heat losses from the solar
collector to the atmosphere, is [12]

Qu Ap FR S  Ul Tin  Ta ;

(2)

where Ta is the ambient temperature and the heat removal factor

(FR) is dened as

FR

_ p
mC
1  exp
Ul Ap




F 0 Ul A p
_ p
mC


;

(3)

where F0 and f are the collector efciency factor and plate effectiveness. An energy balance on the absorber plate yields the following equation for a steady state [12]:



Qu Ap S  Ul Ap Tp  Ta :

(4)

In Eqs. (2)(4) Tp, S and Ap are the average temperature of the absorber plate, radiation absorbed ux by unit area of the absorber
plate and area of the absorber plate, respectively. Ul is the overall loss
coefcient, which during the previous studies assumed as a constant
factor or a variable with little effect; whereas it is not constant. The
calculation of the overall loss coefcient (Ul) is based on simulation
convection and re-radiation losses from the absorber plate to the
atmosphere that the proof of them is not included here to have
a brief note. Thermal efciency of the solar collector is given by [12]

hen

Qu
;
IT Ap

(5)

where IT is the incident solar energy per unit area of the absorber
plate.
3. Optical analysis
In Eq. (2) the radiation absorbed ux by unit area of the absorber
plate (S) is dened as

S saIT ;

(6)

where (sa) is the effective product transmittanceabsorptance that

is equal with the optical efciency (ho) [12].
4. Exergy analysis
Exergy is dened as the maximum amount of work which can
be produced by a system or a ow of matter or energy as it comes to
equilibrium with a reference environment [13]. General form of the
exergy balance equation is [14,15]

E_ in E_ s E_ out E_ l E_ d 0;

(7)

where E_ in , E_ s , E_ out , E_ l and E_ d are the inlet, stored, outlet, leakage and
destroyed exergy rate, respectively.

The inlet exergy rate includes the inlet exergy rate with uid ow
and the absorbed solar radiation exergy rate. The inlet exergy rate
with uid ow is given by [13,16]



_ DPin
m
T
_ p Tin  Ta  Ta ln in
E_ in;f mC

:
r
Ta

(8)

The absorbed solar radiation exergy rate, considering the Petela

theorem, is given by [17]

"

 #
4 Ta
1 Ta 4
_E

:
in;Q ho IT Ap 1 
3 Ts
3 Ts

(9)

The term in the bracket is the Petela efciency (hp). However, this
equation violates the second law of thermodynamics for such
systems [18]. The corrected equation, assuming the sun as an
innite thermal source, is [6,18]



Ta
E_ in;Q ho IT Ap 1 
;
Ts

(10)

where Ts is the apparent sun temperature and equals 75% of

blackbody temperature of the sun [3]. The summation of Eqs. (8)
and (10) will result in total inlet exergy rate of the solar
collector.
The stored exergy rate is null at steady conditions.
The outlet exergy rate includes only the exergy rate of outlet uid
ow [13,16]:




_ DPout
m
T
_ p Tout  Ta  Ta ln out
E_ out;f mC

:
r
Ta

(11)

In Eqs. (8) and (11), DPin and DPout are the pressure difference of the
agent uid with the surroundings at entrance and exit of the solar
collector.
The leakage exergy rate caused by heat leakage rate from the
absorber plate to the environment is [1]




Ta
E_ l Ul Ap Tp  Ta 1 
:
Tp

(12)

The destroyed exergy rate includes three terms; one is caused by

the temperature difference between the absorber plate surface and
the sun [1]:

E_ d;DTs ho IT Ap Ta

1
1
;

Tp Ts

(13)

the second term is caused by the ducts pressure drop [14,15]:


Tout
_ DP Ta ln Ta
m
_E


d;DP
r Tout  Tin

(14)

and the third term is caused by the temperature difference between

the absorber plate surface and the agent uid which is given by
[14,15]

 


T
T  Tin
_ p Ta ln out  out
E_ d;DTf mC
:
Tin
Tp

(15)

The solar collector exergy efciency denes the increase of uid

ow exergy upon the primary radiation exergy by the radiation
source. Substituting Eqs. (8)(15) into Eq. (7) and considering the

S. Farahat et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 11691174

exergy efciency denition, the second law efciency equation of

the solar collector is derived [1,2,18]:

hex



h

DP
T
_ Cp Tout  Tin  Ta ln out
m

r
T

in

Ta
IT Ap 1 
Ts


Tout
(
Ta ln
_ DP
m
Ta


1  1  ho
Ta Tout  Tin
rIT Ap 1 
Ts





Ul Tp  Ta
ho Ta
1
1
T

1 a



Ta
Ta
Tp
Tp Ts
1
IT 1 
Ts
Ts
 


Tout
Tout  Tin 9
ln

=
_ p Ta
mC
T
Tin
p


;
Ta
IT Ap
1
Ts

16

The right-hand side terms in Eq. (16) indicate the exergy losses.
5. Formulation of the optimization problem
The optical, thermal and exergetic models presented in the
previous sections have been transposed into a MATLAB computational program. In this program, most of the geometric parameters
and operating conditions can be variables. The formulation of the
optimization problem, considering the quantities Tin, Ta, Ts, IT, (sa),
ho, S, Va, L3, Di, etc., as constant parameters, is given by

8
>
>
Maximize hex Eq: 16;
>
>
>
>
subject to
>
>
<
Eqs: 16
and
>
>
>
>
> 1  Ap  10;
>
>
>
_  0:009; Tout ; Tp ; Ul ; Qu ; DP; Cp ; r; FR ; F 0 ; f  0:
: 0:001  m
_ are the independent parameters and Tout, Tp, Ul, Qu,
where Ap and m
DP, Cp, r, FR, F0 and f are the dependent parameters in the optimization procedure. Whereas, the objective function and its constraints are nonlinear, it has been maximized numerically with
MATLAB optimization toolbox. MATLAB uses variations of sequential quadratic programming (SQP) method for constrained optimization [19].
5.1. The results of the optimization procedure
The selected environmental and design conditions of the solar
collector and constant parameters for the optimization procedure
are shown in Table 1. For the xed values in Table 1, the
optimization procedure leads to the following optimum values of
the objective function, the independent and dependent optimi_ 0:0087 kg=s,
zation parameters: hex 3.898%, Ap 9.14 m2, m
Tout 358.8248 K, Tp 339.4307 K, Ul 4.6797 W/m2 K, Qu 2139.4
W/m2, Cp 4180.4 J/kg K, DP 0.0011 Pa, hen 46.8144%, FR
0.5573, F0 0.9114, f 0.9943, r 982.2709 kg/m3.
6. Validation of the simulation program
The experimental results of Ref. [2] for the open circuit mode of
the solar collector with serpentine ducts allow the checking of the
results obtained by computer simulation. A comparison has been
made between the computer simulation and experimental results
in the average hourly values for the mean monthly day [2]. Table 2

1171

Table 1
Environmental and design conditions for the solar collector
Collector parameters

Value

Type

Black paint header-riser

at plate
Double glass
Water
Negligible
L1 1 m, L2 Ap/L1 m
25 m/s
20
300 K
4350 K
0.002 m
0.84

Glazing
Agent uid in ow ducts
Adhesive resistance, 1/Cb
Length and width of collector
Wind speed, Va
Collector tilt, b
Fluid inlet and ambient temperature, Tin z Ta
Apparent sun temperature, Ts
Plate thickness, dp
Effective product transmittanceabsorptance or
optical efciency, ho (sa)
Emissivity of the absorber plate, 3p
Emissivity of the covers, 3c
Glass covers distance, d1 d2
Thickness of the back insulation, db
Thickness of the sides insulation, de
Thermal conductivity of the absorber plate, kp
Thermal conductivity of the insulation, ki
Incident solar energy per unit area of the
absorber plate, IT
Tubes centre to centre distance, W
Inner diameter of pipes, Di

0.92
0.88
0.04 m
0.08 m
0.04 m
384 W/m K
0.05 W/m K
500 W/m2
0.15 m
0.04 m

shows this comparison. The computer simulation results are more

accurate than the simulation results of Ref. [2] and are in good
agreement with the experimental data of Ref. [2] because of:
 the correction of the absorbed solar radiation exergy rate by
the solar collector;
 considering the exergy loss caused by the ducts pressure drop;
 the overall thermal loss coefcient, the heat removal factor, the
efciency factor, agent uid properties and other heat transfer
coefcients of the solar collector are assumed to be variables.
On the other hand, the calculated exergy errors compared with
those obtained by experimental can be explained as follows:
 adhesive resistance of the solar collector is neglected;
 wind speed is not constant and has direct effect on the overall
thermal loss coefcient that can decrease the accuracy of the
calculated overall thermal loss coefcient in the computer
simulation;

Table 2
Comparison between the computer simulation and experimental results in the average hourly values for the mean monthly day
Hourly interval
1012

1214

1416

1618

1820

Luminosu and Fara [2]

301.15
CTin z TaDh (K)
503
CITDh (W/m2)
340
CSDh (W/m2)
328.15
CTout.expDh (K)
27
CDTDh (K)
38
Chen.expDh (%)
1.6
Chex.expDh (%)
1.7
Chex.calcDh (%)
eexergy (%)
6.3

810

303.15
795
538
346.15
43
39
2.5
2.6
4.0

305.15
788
580
351.15
46
42
2.9
3
3.4

307.15
489
341
335.15
28
43
1.8
1.7
5.5

306.15
397
268
328.15
22
42
1.4
1.3
7.1

303.15
293
198
320.15
17
42
1.2
1.1
8.3

Present work
CUl.calcDh (W/m2 K)
CTout.calcDh (K)
Chen.calcDh (%)
Chex.expDh (%)
Chex.calcDh (%)
eexergy (%)

4.67
346.56
39.09
2.5
2.55
2

4.75
351.82
42.42
2.9
2.95
1.72

4.63
335.83
41.97
1.8
1.76
2.22

4.56
329.04
31.25
1.4
1.36
2.85

4.47
321.51
44.84
1.2
1.16
3.33

4.48
328.99
39.61
1.6
1.65
3.12

1172

S. Farahat et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 11691174

 the effective product of the transmittanceabsorptance (optical

efciency) assumed constant is changing during the day together with the change of the incidence angle of the solar radiation on the solar collector;
 the assumption that the water temperature at collector inlet
could be approximated by the environmental temperature is
not fullled in the real case;
 when the serpentine solar collector has 10 or more bends (as
expected in practical situations), the heat removal factor is
approximated from Eq. (3) (HottelWhillier equation). However, this equation has errors for low mass ow rate and few
tube bends in the serpentine solar collector [20];
 the radiative properties of the solar collector surfaces are assumed constant.

7. Results and discussion

Fig. 1 shows the behavior of the exergy efciency as a function of
the mass ow rate of uid and the absorber plate area, it is presented to a range of operational and design conditions where the
exergy efciency takes a global maximum value. The incremented
quantities are the absorber plate area from 1 to 10 m2 and the mass

Fig. 1. The variations of the exergy efciency according to the mass ow rate of uid
and absorber plate area.

Fig. 2. The variations of the exergy efciency versus the uid inlet temperature.

Fig. 3. The variations of the exergy efciency versus the pipes diameter.

ow rate of uid from 0.001 to 0.009 kg/s. The calculated values for
_ 0:0087 kg=s,
the global maximum point are Ap 9.14 m2, m
hex 3.898%. As seen, the coordinate of the maximum point is
equal with the values of optimized parameters. Increasing the mass
_ 0:0087 kg=s determines the
ow rate above the value of m
nonchange of exergy efciency for Ap 9.14 m2. This subject allows
the designer to optimize the solar collector regarding other conditions such as design limitations and thermal applications.
Whereas, decreasing the mass ow rate below the value of
_ 0:0087 kg=s determines the sensible decrease of exergy efm
ciency for Ap 9.14 m2 and this subject shows the danger range
more clearly.
Fig. 2 shows the effect of uid inlet temperature on the exergy
efciency. By increasing the uid inlet temperature until the value
of Tin z 315 K, the exergy efciency increases and then decreases
quickly. In a closed circuit solar collector system, since the agent
uid works in a closed loop, if agent uid is not used in a denite
time range, the uid temperature of the storage tank is increased
and subsequently the temperature of uid inlet and the exergy
efciency are increased. Fig. 3 shows the variations of the exergy
efciency versus the pipes diameter. By increasing the pipes

Fig. 4. The variations of the exergy efciency versus the ambient temperature.

S. Farahat et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 11691174

1173

diameter from 0.01 to 0.05 m, the exergy efciency has a slight

increase. Fig. 4 shows the ambient temperature effect on the exergy
efciency. Increasing the ambient temperature from 300 to 313 K
determines the sensible decrease of the exergy efciency. Since the
ambient temperature changes during the day, for having the
maximum exergy efciency other parameters and the solar collector operating conditions should change during the day. Fig. 5
shows the variations of the exergy efciency versus the wind speed.
Increasing the wind speed from 0.001 to 50 m/s determines the
sensible decrease of the exergy efciency from 5 to 3.8%. Fig. 6
shows the optical efciency effect on the exergy efciency. By increasing the optical efciency from 0.01 to 100%, the exergy efciency increases from 0 to 5.4%. Fig. 7 shows the variations of the
exergy efciency with respect to the incident solar energy per unit
area of the absorber plate. By increasing this parameter from 50 to
1000 W/m2, the exergy efciency increases.
8. Concluding remarks
Fig. 5. The variations of the exergy efciency versus the wind speed.

Fig. 6. The variations of the exergy efciency versus the optical efciency.

1. The overall loss coefcient is not a constant parameter. The

precise calculation of this parameter increases the accuracy of
the exergy efciency. The optical efciency has a great effect on
the exergy efciency. By using the at plate solar collectors
with optical concentrators, the optical efciency increases.
2. The energy efciency increases without extremum points with
operating parameters. The absence of such maximum points
has created difculties in the design of at plate solar collectors. However, the exergy efciency presents points of local
maxima and a point of global maximum.
3. By increasing the incident solar energy per unit area of the
absorber plate, the exergy efciency increases. The exergy efciency decreases rapidly when the ambient temperature and
the wind speed increase. Since these parameters change during
the day, for having the maximum exergy efciency other parameters and the solar collector operating conditions should
change during the day and the design of solar collector should
be based on the daily average of these parameters.
4. Increasing the uid inlet temperature increases the exergy efciency but there is a maximum point for the uid inlet temperature where the exergy efciency decreases quickly.
5. The design parameters such as pipes diameter have a little
effect on the exergy efciency.
6. The analysis presented in this paper can be used for the thermodynamic design of similar systems, establishing the optimal
operation parameters for a given set of conditions. The exergy
analysis is more informative in regard to optimum operating
zone, quantifying the inefciencies, their relative magnitudes
and locations and unlike other optimization methods, this
method decreases internal irreversibilities, which is very
important.

Appendix A. Nomenclature

Fig. 7. The variations of the exergy efciency versus the incident solar energy per unit
area of absorber plate.

A
Cp
1/Cb
D
E_
F0
FR
I
k
L
_
m

area (m2)
heat capacity of the uid (kJ/kg K)
adhesive resistance (W/m2 K)
diameter (m)
exergy rate (J/s)
collector efciency factor
heat removal factor
solar radiation intensity (W/m2)
conductivity (W/m K)
dimensions of collector (m)
mass ow rate (kg/s)

1174

P
Q
S
T
U
V
W

S. Farahat et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 11691174

uid pressure (Pa)

heat transfer rate (W)
radiation absorbed ux (W/m2)
temperature (K)
collector loss coefcient (W/m2 K)
speed, velocity (m/s)
tubes centre to centre distance (m)

Greek symbols
a
absorptance
b
collector tilt ( )
D
difference in pressure or temperature
d
distance or thickness (m)
e
error (%)
3
emissivity
h
efciency (%)
s
transmittance
f
plate effectiveness
r
density (kg/m3)
effective product transmittanceabsorptance
(sa)

Subscripts
1
rst, length
2
second, width
3
height
a
ambient, adhesive, wind
b
back
c
cover
calc
calculated
d
destroyed
e
side
en
energy
ex
exergy
exp
experimental
exergy exergy efciency
f
uid
h
hot, hourly
i
inner, insulation
in
inlet
l
leakage, overall
m
monthly
o
optical
out
outlet
p
absorber plate, Petela
Q
heat transfer
s
stored, sun

T
u

incident
useful

Statistics symbols
hourly average
C Dh
References
[1] Dutta Gupta KK, Saha SK. Energy analysis of solar thermal collectors. Renewable Energy and Environment 1990:2837.
[2] Luminosu I, Fara L. Determination of the optimal operation mode of a at solar
collector by exergetic analysis and numerical simulation. Energy 2005;30:
73147.
[3] Bejan A, Keary DW, Kreith F. Second law analysis and synthesis of solar collector systems. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 1981;103:238.
[4] Suzuki A, Okamura H, Oshida I. Application of exergy concept to the analysis of
optimum operating conditions of solar heat collectors. Journal of Solar Energy
Engineering 1987;109(4):33742.
[5] Liu Geng, Cengel YA, Turner RH. Exergy analysis of a solar heating system.
Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 1995;117:24951.
[6] Torres-Reyes E, Cervantes de Gortari JG, Ibarra-Salazar BA, Picon-Nunez M. A
design method of at-plate solar collectors based on minimum entropy generation. Exergy 2001;1(1):4652.
[7] Tyagi SK, Shengwei Wang, Singhal MK, Kaushik SC, Park SR. Exergy analysis
and parametric study of concentrating type solar collectors. International
Journal of Thermal Sciences 2007;46:130410.
[8] Badescu Viorel. Optimal control of ow in solar collectors for maximum exergy extraction. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 2007;50:
431122.
[9] Farahat S, Ajam H, Sarhaddi F. Optimization of linear parabolic solar collectors
with exergy concept and comparison with energy analysis. In: Proceedings of
the fourth international mechanical engineering conference and ninth annual
paper meet, Dhaka, Bangladesh, December 2004. p. 13946.
[10] Ajam H, Farahat S, Sarhaddi F. Exergetic optimization of solar air heaters and
comparison with energy analysis. International Journal of Thermodynamics
December 2005;8(4):18390.
[11] Sarhaddi F, Farahat S, Ajam H, Sobhnamayan F. Thermodynamic optimization
of the solar parabolic cookers and comparison with energy analysis. In: Proceedings of the fth international chemical engineering congress (IChEC
2008), Kish Island, Iran, January 2008.
[12] Sukhatme SP. Solar energy. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1993. p. 83139.
[13] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Malabar, FL: Krieger
Publish Company; 1995.
[14] Suzuki A. General theory of exergy balance analysis and application to solar
collectors. Energy 1988;13(2):15360.
[15] Suzuki A. A fundamental equation for exergy balance on solar collectors.
Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 1988;110(2):1026.
[16] Bejan A. Advanced engineering thermodynamics. New York: Wiley Interscience; 1988. p. 1337, 4625.
[17] Petela R. Exergy of heat radiation. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 1964;86:187
92.
[18] Najian MR. Exergy analysis of at plate solar collector. MS Thesis, Tehran, Iran:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Tehran University; 2000.
[19] Optimization toolbox users guide version 2, Copyright 19952007. The
MathWorks, Inc.. Available from: <http://www.mathworks.com/products/
optimization>; 2007.
[20] Dayan M. High performance in low-ow solar domestic hot water systems. MS
Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of WisconsinMadison; 1997. p. 1955 [chapter 3].